Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
Arusin
Topic Author
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2020 8:11 pm

Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:42 pm

The a330 when it first came out in the 1980s, it was a huge seller for airlines. As time went on and the 787 and a350 were introduced, the a330 as slowly fallen off even with the new a330 neo being introduced.
I have heard several reasons for this. Some say the current a330s are still fairly new and the replacement cycle has not started. Others say the 787 and a350 though being long haul are cannibalizing the a330 and many airlines are utilizing the 787 as replacement aircrafts to their old a330s.

This question is 3 parts.

1. Is there a business case for offering a 787-9 variant that is lower range (even to compliment the 787-10).

2. What would be needed to achieve such an aircraft.

3. If not, Is the current 787-9 seat for seat still more economical than the a330-900 on the routes 9-7 hours.
 
User avatar
Pudelhund
Posts: 261
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2019 11:06 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 1:50 pm

Although smaller, that’s essentially what the original 787-3 idea was supposed to be, but shedding costs in the unique features that was supposed to make it worthwhile ended up with a plane only marginally better than the 787-8 and rather pointless. I don’t think a new variant’s potential costs outweigh the many cost variables of just operating the aircraft.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8096
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:03 pm

Arusin wrote:
3. If not, Is the current 787-9 seat for seat still more economical than the a330-900 on the routes 9-7 hours.


That's a good question. Boeing would probably argue they've got the 787-10 for that, and its superior CASM.
 
ILNFlyer
Posts: 521
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:05 pm

It's likely better just "abuse" a -8.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10637
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:17 pm

Just like what Airbus does, Boeing offers multiple MTOW options. Those intending to use a 789 in a more regional role do not have to take the full 254t MTOW.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 2388
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:20 pm

ANA and JAL has B788 and B789s with high seat counts doing domestic flights in Japan for years already. IIRC the B788 has 335 seats and the B789 has 395 seats.

SIA and EVA have high seat-count B78X flying short flights in Asia too.

Do all these aircraft have lower MTOW so that airport fees are lower?
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
b747400erf
Posts: 3165
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:33 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:38 pm

European airlines fly the 787 in Europe and Asian airlines in Asia many on domestic routes

The American 787 airlines operating the 787 fly on some domestic hops but a regional is limited in seat numbers by a scope clause
 
User avatar
oxonrow
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:04 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:46 pm

Yes, if we can keep the middle seat open for the foreseeable future... :duck:
 
User avatar
Antaras
Posts: 840
Joined: Thu Aug 15, 2019 6:18 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:06 pm

Arusin wrote:
1. Is there a business case for offering a 787-9 variant that is lower range (even to compliment the 787-10).

2. What would be needed to achieve such an aircraft.

3. If not, Is the current 787-9 seat for seat still more economical than the a330-900 on the routes 9-7 hours.


1. Yes, yes, yes and yes. Just an example: VN uses 311-seat B789 and 367-seat B78X on the 2-hour HAN-SGN route. Besides VN there are lots of carriers use the 789/78X for the same purpose (JL, NH, SQ, TR,...)

2. What is needed? An email to Boeing before the airframe is pushed into the production line. Or you can negotiate when you ordered the aircraft. Done.

3. Yah the 789's CASM is slightly better than the A339's CASM.
Edit signature
This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 255 character limit.
 
Arusin
Topic Author
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2020 8:11 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:12 pm

I read somewhere that they derate those engines for the less fuel they fill those planes on those routes. It was said, China Eastern,Southern will not use the 787-8 or 9s on their regional routes because the aircrafts are too heavy.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:28 pm

787-10 regional seems more sense
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4485
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 3:48 pm

Armadillo1 wrote:
787-10 regional seems more sense


The 787-10 is already a regional airplane, especially if you max out the payload.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2221
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 5:12 pm

The 787 carries the weight of an 8,000 mile range aircraft. Ideally, a new wing would be needed designed for say 5,500 miles to get the structural weight down. Using for regional routes is fine, but there will be other planes with lower cost by elimination of said weight.
 
zkncj
Posts: 3875
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 4:57 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 8:28 pm

On shorter routers, someone airlines use the excess MTOW for cargo capacity on there 789s. Especially when on some short-haul routes allot of passengers are carry-on only. It gives the airline allot of sellable cargo space to make an profit on.
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 8:31 pm

Yes, the 787-10.
 
cledaybuck
Posts: 1714
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 6:07 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 8:32 pm

No. Only paper derates, etc.
As we celebrate mediocrity, all the boys upstairs want to see, how much you'll pay for what you used to get for free.
 
smartplane
Posts: 1509
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:23 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 8:57 pm

Bulk of the savings come from lower airport and engine maintenance fees. Former is negated presently, as many airports outside the USA have reduced, or changed their pricing formula. The latter works, but not at current low utilisation levels, and the fees incurred to change make less attractive (for example, lessee incurs fees to re-instate as part of EOL balloon payment).

Who is buying and financing new WB aircraft at present? Even existing orders are being largely financed by the air frame and engine OEM's as default lenders of last resort.
 
User avatar
Boeing757100
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed May 06, 2020 10:09 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pm

As PudleHund stated, this was the original 787-3 idea that was around 2007.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:19 pm

JayinKitsap wrote:
Ideally, a new wing would be needed designed for say 5,500 miles to get the structural weight down.

Which, as has been mentioned prior, is essentially what the 783 would've been... and it turns out that it wouldn't have been all that much more efficient than abusing a 788, and far more inflexible.

Boeing would likely have to spend hundreds of millions, if not up to a billion, bucks to develop a wing that'd make enough of a difference for this to be worthwhile.

And the obvious followup question is of course: why bother? ...when the 78X is already positioned for a regional role, and the money they'd spend would likely be better invested in fortifying the model that does sell: 789.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 3586
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:23 pm

Cointrin330 wrote:
Yes, the 787-10.


Some EU and USA operators are using the B78X on long routes, like EWR-TLV, SFO-AKL, and AMS-SFO. (The first two are on 318-seat aircraft and the last one on a 344-seater.)
 
9Patch
Posts: 581
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2019 10:38 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:30 pm

Polot wrote:
Just like what Airbus does, Boeing offers multiple MTOW options. Those intending to use a 789 in a more regional role do not have to take the full 254t MTOW.


What's involved in reducing the MTOW?
How much can the MTOW be reduced percentage wise?
 
Cointrin330
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2016 12:23 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Wed Aug 05, 2020 12:42 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
Cointrin330 wrote:
Yes, the 787-10.


Some EU and USA operators are using the B78X on long routes, like EWR-TLV, SFO-AKL, and AMS-SFO. (The first two are on 318-seat aircraft and the last one on a 344-seater.)


Yes, it has the range to do those flights but within Asia, some operators, principally SQ, are using it for regional flights because it can handle volume (pax and cargo). The economics of the 789 are really focused on long, thin routes or simply ultra-long haul, and that's where the plane is most efficient. It has the longest range of the 787 program.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1803
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Wed Aug 05, 2020 1:00 am

Arusin wrote:
I read somewhere that they derate those engines for the less fuel they fill those planes on those routes. It was said, China Eastern,Southern will not use the 787-8 or 9s on their regional routes because the aircrafts are too heavy.

These exact two carriers flies 787-8 and -9 on sub-3hr flights multiple times daily.

Michael
 
dstblj52
Posts: 467
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:38 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Wed Aug 05, 2020 2:41 am

9Patch wrote:
Polot wrote:
Just like what Airbus does, Boeing offers multiple MTOW options. Those intending to use a 789 in a more regional role do not have to take the full 254t MTOW.


What's involved in reducing the MTOW?
How much can the MTOW be reduced percentage wise?

What their referring to are paperwork derates where the MTOW is changed in the plane documentation so that the airline can get a discount in fact you can usually buy up again later
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 2221
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:40 am

LAX772LR wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
Ideally, a new wing would be needed designed for say 5,500 miles to get the structural weight down.

Which, as has been mentioned prior, is essentially what the 783 would've been... and it turns out that it wouldn't have been all that much more efficient than abusing a 788, and far more inflexible.

Boeing would likely have to spend hundreds of millions, if not up to a billion, bucks to develop a wing that'd make enough of a difference for this to be worthwhile.

And the obvious followup question is of course: why bother? ...when the 78X is already positioned for a regional role, and the money they'd spend would likely be better invested in fortifying the model that does sell: 789.


Yes, the 787X is the right answer to cover shorter (but still quite good range) routes. My point was a new wing is needed to do a regional plane right, but yes the economics preclude doing a low volume model as any savings get eaten up by operating a small fleet, ie abusing a 788 costs less than operating some 787-3's.
 
Armadillo1
Posts: 560
Joined: Thu Apr 20, 2017 5:14 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Wed Aug 05, 2020 8:45 am

wiki - A330-100/500, -400
same target
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 19126
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Wed Aug 05, 2020 10:46 am

Arusin wrote:
1. Is there a business case for offering a 787-9 variant that is lower range (even to compliment the 787-10).


Probably not just now given Boeing has warned of possible forward loss for the 787 in their second quarter 10-Q filing.

https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/ed ... 3010-q.htm
The 787 program has near breakeven gross margins due to the reductions in the production rates and the reduction in the program accounting quantity. If we are required to further reduce production rates or experience other factors that could result in lower margins, the program could record a reach-forward loss in future periods.
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.
 
ItnStln
Posts: 130
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:47 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Wed Aug 05, 2020 5:13 pm

Pudelhund wrote:
Although smaller, that’s essentially what the original 787-3 idea was supposed to be, but shedding costs in the unique features that was supposed to make it worthwhile ended up with a plane only marginally better than the 787-8 and rather pointless. I don’t think a new variant’s potential costs outweigh the many cost variables of just operating the aircraft.

A 787-3 to replace older 767 would be cool.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1272
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 12:53 am

1. There is such market for such version. Alongside the regional version of B787-8.

2. The biggest modifications they need are smaller wings + less powerful engines. We know derated engines are being used on regional version of A350-900, but some members on this forum did said that derated engines doesn't actually created much fuel savings, it's primary advantages is to preserve the engines which resulted in lower maintenance costs for that derated engines.

As for engine options, GEnx variants that being used on current B787. GEnx-1B54/P2 have lower thrust at 57,400 lbf. This could be used for B787-8. While B787-9 could probably use the current B787-8's engine instead.

3. I do believe A330-900neo have better performance for 7-9 hours routes. Remember, B787 are utilized for long haul market. While A330 which developed from A300. Were design for shorter and medium haul market.

It's not easy beating A330-900neo on such short flights.
 
2175301
Posts: 1873
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 1:49 am

The twin isle MOM (NMA/797) was targeted for most of this market segment. I lighter aircraft than the 787 as you don't need the structural weight required to carry long distance fuel.

At this time I do not believe that there is an adequate market for this kind of aircraft. While you can abuse a 788 to a point; the reality is that there is not enough of a market at this time to develop a lighter more efficient aircraft.

Have a great day,
 
User avatar
A300neo
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2020 4:27 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:46 am

ItnStln wrote:
Pudelhund wrote:
Although smaller, that’s essentially what the original 787-3 idea was supposed to be, but shedding costs in the unique features that was supposed to make it worthwhile ended up with a plane only marginally better than the 787-8 and rather pointless. I don’t think a new variant’s potential costs outweigh the many cost variables of just operating the aircraft.

A 787-3 to replace older 767 would be cool.

The easier way would be to modernize the 767 with the 748's GenX engines. A lot cheaper, cargo companies would love it, too, and you dont need an expensive new wing design (would cost 1-2 billion).

A 767neo would be a fitting design for Asia.
 
User avatar
A300neo
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2020 4:27 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:52 am

ewt340 wrote:
3. I do believe A330-900neo have better performance for 7-9 hours routes. Remember, B787 are utilized for long haul market. While A330 which developed from A300. Were design for shorter and medium haul market.

It's not easy beating A330-900neo on such short flights.

I beg to differ, it is easy to beat the A330, bc it is a much heavier aircraft than the A300. The wings are completely different and there is a lot of additional weight, that nobody wants on short routes. Hence next to nobody orders the A330 regional. An updated 767 would have a far better CASM, simply because it is still lighter than any de-rated A330, even without any fancy carbon fibres materials.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 20069
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 1:18 pm

VSMUT wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
787-10 regional seems more sense


The 787-10 is already a regional airplane, especially if you max out the payload.

Yet it flew TPAC for UA. That level of versatility is valuable.

The proposed NMA, designed from the start with 2/3rds the 787 range would be the better small regional, but we know that is years away.

Lightsaber
Winter is coming.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8096
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 1:59 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
JayinKitsap wrote:
Ideally, a new wing would be needed designed for say 5,500 miles to get the structural weight down.

Which, as has been mentioned prior, is essentially what the 783 would've been... and it turns out that it wouldn't have been all that much more efficient than abusing a 788, and far more inflexible.

Boeing would likely have to spend hundreds of millions, if not up to a billion, bucks to develop a wing that'd make enough of a difference for this to be worthwhile.

And the obvious followup question is of course: why bother? ...when the 78X is already positioned for a regional role, and the money they'd spend would likely be better invested in fortifying the model that does sell: 789.


I'm with you on the 'Why bother?' point. I don't see how the $ math works for Boeing. I don't see how many carriers would want to lock themselves into a range limitation unless they have very, very specific network needs.

Carriers will have 321LRs, XLRs, and MAX 10s for the stuff under 7 hours, so we're really looking at routes more than 7 but less than 9 or 10 hours. That's a small niche to satisfy ROI on the work for a new wing, landing gear, etc. Compare 773 to 77W sales. Compare A330neo sales to A350 sales (after deleting orders from carriers with no money, or under sanctions and no ability to buy).
 
VSMUT
Posts: 4485
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 11:40 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 2:02 pm

lightsaber wrote:
VSMUT wrote:
Armadillo1 wrote:
787-10 regional seems more sense


The 787-10 is already a regional airplane, especially if you max out the payload.

Yet it flew TPAC for UA. That level of versatility is valuable.

The proposed NMA, designed from the start with 2/3rds the 787 range would be the better small regional, but we know that is years away.

Lightsaber


"if you max out the payload".

It is no secret that the trans-pacific United Airlines 787-10 flights operated with much less payload, there were insiders on this forum who posted the figures.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1803
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 2:12 pm

A300neo wrote:
ItnStln wrote:
Pudelhund wrote:
Although smaller, that’s essentially what the original 787-3 idea was supposed to be, but shedding costs in the unique features that was supposed to make it worthwhile ended up with a plane only marginally better than the 787-8 and rather pointless. I don’t think a new variant’s potential costs outweigh the many cost variables of just operating the aircraft.

A 787-3 to replace older 767 would be cool.

The easier way would be to modernize the 767 with the 748's GenX engines. A lot cheaper, cargo companies would love it, too, and you dont need an expensive new wing design (would cost 1-2 billion).

A 767neo would be a fitting design for Asia.

As others mentioend upthread (or in Boeing 767neo thread can't remember) you cannot fit a typical GENx-2B engine under 767's wing due to height clearance.

Last time they tried to extend landing gear so they can fit new engines under it did not end up well.

And finally Asian carriers are known to abuse new models on short haul flights, in most cases they would rather buy those planes to have a common fleet than to introduce a new subfleet of 767neo. Most pax operators in Asia have ditched 767s, and A330s/A350s/787s are doing sub-3hr flight across the region on a daily basis.

Michael
 
superjeff
Posts: 1373
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2010 2:14 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 2:50 pm

b747400erf wrote:
European airlines fly the 787 in Europe and Asian airlines in Asia many on domestic routes

The American 787 airlines operating the 787 fly on some domestic hops but a regional is limited in seat numbers by a scope clause



In the U.S., the Scope clause is intended to limit the use of outsourcing flying to additional (i.e., lower cost) airlines, almost, if not always, commuter carriers, like Skywest, Republic, and Mesa. It limits "Regional Jets" to airplanes generally carrying 76 or fewer passengers. It has nothing to do with restricting the use of larger gets on regional routes. Any of the U.S. carriers can run any widebody on any route without problems, because they use mainline crews, and would not be restricted by the scope clause. For example, American's future SEA-BLR route will use a 787-9 originating in Los Angeles, flying LAX-SEA-BLR. The LAX-SEA portion is about 3 hours (think Singapore-Hong Kong). However, the airlines have found that U.S. flyers demand frequency over size, so it is more cost effective (and profitable) to fly two A321's or 3 738's LAX-SEA-LAX most of the time than one 787, absent a reason to do so. You'll also find widebody positioning flights on American on routes like DFW-ORD, on United IAH-EWR, and on Delta hub-to-hub flights.
 
2175301
Posts: 1873
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 2:54 pm

eamondzhang wrote:
As others mentioend upthread (or in Boeing 767neo thread can't remember) you cannot fit a typical GENx-2B engine under 767's wing due to height clearance.

Last time they tried to extend landing gear so they can fit new engines under it did not end up well.

And finally Asian carriers are known to abuse new models on short haul flights, in most cases they would rather buy those planes to have a common fleet than to introduce a new subfleet of 767neo. Most pax operators in Asia have ditched 767s, and A330s/A350s/787s are doing sub-3hr flight across the region on a daily basis.

Michael


You are incorrect. You cannot fit the 748 engines under the 767-300 wings. They do fit under the 767-400 wings, which is a model that already has an extended landing gear as part of the "400" design.

That is why Boeing has indicated that they are working on a 767-400 Freighter, and has discussed the possibilities of a passenger variant. My understanding in 2019 is that at the time that Boeing did not see a large passenger aircraft market for a 764 "neo." Times change, we will have to see. My information from a mid level insider at Boeing in late 2019 was that the 764F with 748 engines would be forthcoming to replace the 763F.

Have a great day,
 
yosm
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:58 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:05 pm

Reads titel:
Answer: Yes.
 
ILNFlyer
Posts: 521
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:34 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:50 pm

cledaybuck wrote:
No. Only paper derates, etc.


Why isn't removing fuel tanks from the wings a viable option to create a shorter range, lighter winged aircraft at the time the aircraft is ordered? Is such an option plausible??
 
Sokes
Posts: 1672
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:48 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:53 pm

2175301 wrote:
That is why Boeing has indicated that they are working on a 767-400 Freighter, and has discussed the possibilities of a passenger variant. My understanding in 2019 is that at the time that Boeing did not see a large passenger aircraft market for a 764 "neo." Times change, we will have to see. My information from a mid level insider at Boeing in late 2019 was that the 764F with 748 engines would be forthcoming to replace the 763F.

Have a great day,

The GEnx was designed for the B787 and also used for B747-8.
A330, A330 Neo, B787 all have around the same engine power.
Why would Airbus build another long range plane when A350 and B787 already served that segment?
Why did Boeing never start the MOM?
So I doubt without a new engine a medium range B787 makes sense.
And I don't see a point to put an engine that's overpowered for 8 abreast on a seven abreast plane.
Why can't the world be a little bit more autistic?
 
ewt340
Posts: 1272
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:56 pm

A300neo wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
3. I do believe A330-900neo have better performance for 7-9 hours routes. Remember, B787 are utilized for long haul market. While A330 which developed from A300. Were design for shorter and medium haul market.

It's not easy beating A330-900neo on such short flights.

I beg to differ, it is easy to beat the A330, bc it is a much heavier aircraft than the A300. The wings are completely different and there is a lot of additional weight, that nobody wants on short routes. Hence next to nobody orders the A330 regional. An updated 767 would have a far better CASM, simply because it is still lighter than any de-rated A330, even without any fancy carbon fibres materials.


Uhmm, Obviously A330 are heavier then A300. Cause it's longer and carry more passengers. I did said its "developed" from A300. It doesn't mean that they use the same wings of have he same weight. What I mean is that A330 are utilized for mostly regional routes, just like B787-10. Now, A330-900neo got some upgrade which allows them to fly up to ~7,000nmi. But realistically, most airlines wouldn't use all those range. Those capability tend to be used for heavier payloads instead.

A330-900neo could still be classified as medium-haul aircraft rather than long-haul aircraft. As for B767. Which B767 do you referring to? the -400ER might beat A330-900neo. -300ER, don't think it would.
As for my understanding, derated engines doesn't actually saves fuel. It help lowering the engine maintenance costs.

Back to the topic. If Boeing use smaller wings on both B787-8 and -9. And then fitted them with engines that have lower thrust. It would easily beat both A330-800neo and A330-900neo.
But the problem is, in the next 5 years, would Boeing have enough resources and time to do it since they haven't finished B777X and the MAX.
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 10637
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 4:25 pm

ewt340 wrote:
A300neo wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
3. I do believe A330-900neo have better performance for 7-9 hours routes. Remember, B787 are utilized for long haul market. While A330 which developed from A300. Were design for shorter and medium haul market.

It's not easy beating A330-900neo on such short flights.

I beg to differ, it is easy to beat the A330, bc it is a much heavier aircraft than the A300. The wings are completely different and there is a lot of additional weight, that nobody wants on short routes. Hence next to nobody orders the A330 regional. An updated 767 would have a far better CASM, simply because it is still lighter than any de-rated A330, even without any fancy carbon fibres materials.


Uhmm, Obviously A330 are heavier then A300. Cause it's longer and carry more passengers. I did said its "developed" from A300. It doesn't mean that they use the same wings of have he same weight. What I mean is that A330 are utilized for mostly regional routes, just like B787-10. Now, A330-900neo got some upgrade which allows them to fly up to ~7,000nmi. But realistically, most airlines wouldn't use all those range. Those capability tend to be used for heavier payloads instead.

A330-900neo could still be classified as medium-haul aircraft rather than long-haul aircraft. As for B767. Which B767 do you referring to? the -400ER might beat A330-900neo. -300ER, don't think it would.
As for my understanding, derated engines doesn't actually saves fuel. It help lowering the engine maintenance costs.

Back to the topic. If Boeing use smaller wings on both B787-8 and -9. And then fitted them with engines that have lower thrust. It would easily beat both A330-800neo and A330-900neo.
But the problem is, in the next 5 years, would Boeing have enough resources and time to do it since they haven't finished B777X and the MAX.

Really the only thing linking the A300 and A330 are the fuselage and tail. Other than that they are two very different aircraft- saying the A330 was developed from the A300 is akin to saying the 737 was developed from the 707. The A330neo is much much much closer in OEW to the 787 (both within a few tons of each, basically the same depending on airline) than the A300. The A330’s wing is actually slightly bigger than the 787’s.

Don’t confuse early A330’s stunted range and regional use for the plane actually being optimized for that role.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 6:39 pm

ILNFlyer wrote:
Why isn't removing fuel tanks from the wings a viable option to create a shorter range, lighter winged aircraft at the time the aircraft is ordered?

Flip the question: why would it be?

You'd barely be saving any weight, but severely limiting capability options (thus affecting resale and depreciation among other things). Who'd buy that?



ewt340 wrote:
A330-900neo could still be classified as medium-haul aircraft rather than long-haul aircraft.

...the newest iterations have longer range than a 744, and the weight is similar to a 789 that can fly 18hr flights.

Gonna say that the threshold for "medium-haul" has been exceeded.



Lootess wrote:
Also all the hoopla about name recognition of FLL vs MIA isn't true at-all, Southwest has been living off of FLL forever, and if you are working/taking a cruise you will know FLL is the place to fly. not MIA.

Why would you expect people from the Indian Ocean rim, to know anything about that, using a domestic US carrier's antics as a corroborative example?
Last edited by LAX772LR on Thu Aug 06, 2020 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
ewt340
Posts: 1272
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 6:41 pm

Polot wrote:
ewt340 wrote:
A300neo wrote:
I beg to differ, it is easy to beat the A330, bc it is a much heavier aircraft than the A300. The wings are completely different and there is a lot of additional weight, that nobody wants on short routes. Hence next to nobody orders the A330 regional. An updated 767 would have a far better CASM, simply because it is still lighter than any de-rated A330, even without any fancy carbon fibres materials.


Uhmm, Obviously A330 are heavier then A300. Cause it's longer and carry more passengers. I did said its "developed" from A300. It doesn't mean that they use the same wings of have he same weight. What I mean is that A330 are utilized for mostly regional routes, just like B787-10. Now, A330-900neo got some upgrade which allows them to fly up to ~7,000nmi. But realistically, most airlines wouldn't use all those range. Those capability tend to be used for heavier payloads instead.

A330-900neo could still be classified as medium-haul aircraft rather than long-haul aircraft. As for B767. Which B767 do you referring to? the -400ER might beat A330-900neo. -300ER, don't think it would.
As for my understanding, derated engines doesn't actually saves fuel. It help lowering the engine maintenance costs.

Back to the topic. If Boeing use smaller wings on both B787-8 and -9. And then fitted them with engines that have lower thrust. It would easily beat both A330-800neo and A330-900neo.
But the problem is, in the next 5 years, would Boeing have enough resources and time to do it since they haven't finished B777X and the MAX.

Really the only thing linking the A300 and A330 are the fuselage and tail. Other than that they are two very different aircraft- saying the A330 was developed from the A300 is akin to saying the 737 was developed from the 707. The A330neo is much much much closer in OEW to the 787 (both within a few tons of each, basically the same depending on airline) than the A300. The A330’s wing is actually slightly bigger than the 787’s.

Don’t confuse early A330’s stunted range and regional use for the plane actually being optimized for that role.


Uhmm, A300 and A330 is literally the equivalent of B777 and B777X. Heck, B777X have way more modifications to the fuselage, wings and engines than A330. But it's still B777 isn't it?

The fundamental of A330 rooted deeply in A300. You could say that B737 developed from B707. But I would say B727 instead. They are not the same aircraft, obviously, but what they are optimized for are what we need to look into. A330ceo are a "stretch" version of A300.

The fact of the matter is, most A330ceo are being used for short-medium haul routes. Same as A330-900neo.

We all know B787-9 are being optimized for longer routes. I don't understand why people think that you could just flip them around and think the efficiency would follow all scenario.
 
ewt340
Posts: 1272
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 6:45 pm

LAX772LR wrote:
ILNFlyer wrote:
Why isn't removing fuel tanks from the wings a viable option to create a shorter range, lighter winged aircraft at the time the aircraft is ordered?

Flip the question: why would it be?

You'd barely be saving any weight, but severely limiting capability options (thus affecting resale and depreciation among other things). Who'd buy that?



ewt340 wrote:
A330-900neo could still be classified as medium-haul aircraft rather than long-haul aircraft.

...the newest iterations have longer range than a 744, and the weight is similar to a 789 that can fly 18hr flights.

Gonna say that the threshold for "medium-haul" has been exceeded.



Lootess wrote:
Also all the hoopla about name recognition of FLL vs MIA isn't true at-all, Southwest has been living off of FLL forever, and if you are working/taking a cruise you will know FLL is the place to fly. not MIA.

Why would you expect people from the Indian Ocean rim, to know anything about that, using a domestic US carrier's antics as a corroborative example?


I don't think A330-900neo cannot match B787-9's 18 hours flight. It have similar range to B747-400 without the capability of B747-400. After all the passengers, their luggage, cargo and weather. Would they be able to fly as far as B747-400? Probably not.
 
User avatar
A300neo
Posts: 41
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2020 4:27 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 9:35 pm

Sokes wrote:
2175301 wrote:
That is why Boeing has indicated that they are working on a 767-400 Freighter, and has discussed the possibilities of a passenger variant. My understanding in 2019 is that at the time that Boeing did not see a large passenger aircraft market for a 764 "neo." Times change, we will have to see. My information from a mid level insider at Boeing in late 2019 was that the 764F with 748 engines would be forthcoming to replace the 763F.

The GEnx was designed for the B787 and also used for B747-8.
A330, A330 Neo, B787 all have around the same engine power.

That's correct, but the GenX-version of the 748 is smaller, hence it would also fit under the 767-400 airframe. Due to the reduced diameter of the 748's GenX, its bypass ratio is worse; hence the fuel consumption is a bit higher, too. A de-rated version would increase the bypass-ratio again, thus safe a bit of fuel.
And I don't see a point to put an engine that's overpowered for 8 abreast on a seven abreast plane.

You could fly the 767 also 8 abreast. TUI UK does that for short range flights to tourist destination, and it also would be an option in Asia, where people generally have less height and weight compared to the US or Europe. Furthermore, don't forget the business case of freighters. If fully loaded, these need some power, too, besides, the 767-400 is already the longest/heaviest type.

@ewt340:
Uhmm, Obviously A330 are heavier then A300. Cause it's longer and carry more passengers.

.. and because its wings are design for long-range. That's the main difference and also the main difference for the 767 being less heavy. However, in short and mid-range these wings are useless, you only have to pay for them. Don't forget that both Boeing and Airbus have invested a lot in light-weigh technologies. Weight is an important factor. However, it really is ironical that both companies have designed light long-range planes, which are then often used for mid-range connections. However, in that segment, these planes have to be considered rather heavy. So basically the whole light-weight technology is used for no benefit. Nevertheless, you have to pay for the light-weight tec when buying a A350/B787.

The old, cheap construction is currently one of the few selling points of the A330neo. Still, nobody wants its shorter version - because even thought it is cheap, it is too heavy. A new 767 would be a nice option for airlines currently flying A332 and looking to renew the fleet after 2025. Airbus hopes that those all would order A338 .. but I think that is wishful thinking. Some will already choose the B787 and for those that don't need the range, a B767-400neo would be a very good alternative - if Boeing would build it.

@eamondzhang
Most pax operators in Asia have ditched 767s, and A330s/A350s/787s are doing sub-3hr flight across the region on a daily basis

Of course, the simple reason for that is that there is no new wide-body with modern engines. Hence, the only possibility is to "abuse" long-range planes for these connections. SIA flew a lot of A300 and A310 20 years ago. When they wanted to modernize their fleet they wanted Airbus to build an A330 with the A300 wings, it was called A330-100. Airbus considered it, but then offered only a so called "A330-500", which only had a shortened fuselage but still featured the heavy wings of the A330/340. Hence SIA told them "No, thanks" and ordered a mixture of B772 and B737 instead.

@2175301:
Thanks for the information.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13278
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 10:14 pm

ewt340 wrote:
I don't think A330-900neo cannot match B787-9's 18 hours flight.

No one's saying it can match a 789s range, but what it can do is 14 to 15hr flights, which are decidedly not medium-haul.

A330-900 now has more range than the original A340-311 possessed, and that was designed as the longhaul version of this frame.



ewt340 wrote:
It have similar range to B747-400 without the capability of B747-400. After all the passengers, their luggage, cargo and weather.

What capability are you presuming it doesn't have? ...it actually carries more cargo than a 744 can.

And "weather" :confused:
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
ewt340
Posts: 1272
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 7:22 pm

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 11:42 pm

A300neo wrote:
Sokes wrote:
2175301 wrote:
That is why Boeing has indicated that they are working on a 767-400 Freighter, and has discussed the possibilities of a passenger variant. My understanding in 2019 is that at the time that Boeing did not see a large passenger aircraft market for a 764 "neo." Times change, we will have to see. My information from a mid level insider at Boeing in late 2019 was that the 764F with 748 engines would be forthcoming to replace the 763F.

The GEnx was designed for the B787 and also used for B747-8.
A330, A330 Neo, B787 all have around the same engine power.

That's correct, but the GenX-version of the 748 is smaller, hence it would also fit under the 767-400 airframe. Due to the reduced diameter of the 748's GenX, its bypass ratio is worse; hence the fuel consumption is a bit higher, too. A de-rated version would increase the bypass-ratio again, thus safe a bit of fuel.
And I don't see a point to put an engine that's overpowered for 8 abreast on a seven abreast plane.

You could fly the 767 also 8 abreast. TUI UK does that for short range flights to tourist destination, and it also would be an option in Asia, where people generally have less height and weight compared to the US or Europe. Furthermore, don't forget the business case of freighters. If fully loaded, these need some power, too, besides, the 767-400 is already the longest/heaviest type.

@ewt340:
Uhmm, Obviously A330 are heavier then A300. Cause it's longer and carry more passengers.

.. and because its wings are design for long-range. That's the main difference and also the main difference for the 767 being less heavy. However, in short and mid-range these wings are useless, you only have to pay for them. Don't forget that both Boeing and Airbus have invested a lot in light-weigh technologies. Weight is an important factor. However, it really is ironical that both companies have designed light long-range planes, which are then often used for mid-range connections. However, in that segment, these planes have to be considered rather heavy. So basically the whole light-weight technology is used for no benefit. Nevertheless, you have to pay for the light-weight tec when buying a A350/B787.

The old, cheap construction is currently one of the few selling points of the A330neo. Still, nobody wants its shorter version - because even thought it is cheap, it is too heavy. A new 767 would be a nice option for airlines currently flying A332 and looking to renew the fleet after 2025. Airbus hopes that those all would order A338 .. but I think that is wishful thinking. Some will already choose the B787 and for those that don't need the range, a B767-400neo would be a very good alternative - if Boeing would build it.

@eamondzhang
Most pax operators in Asia have ditched 767s, and A330s/A350s/787s are doing sub-3hr flight across the region on a daily basis

Of course, the simple reason for that is that there is no new wide-body with modern engines. Hence, the only possibility is to "abuse" long-range planes for these connections. SIA flew a lot of A300 and A310 20 years ago. When they wanted to modernize their fleet they wanted Airbus to build an A330 with the A300 wings, it was called A330-100. Airbus considered it, but then offered only a so called "A330-500", which only had a shortened fuselage but still featured the heavy wings of the A330/340. Hence SIA told them "No, thanks" and ordered a mixture of B772 and B737 instead.

@2175301:
Thanks for the information.


The larger wing on A330 are caused by larger passengers count and larger range. But, the range and capability of A330-300 wouldn't be enough to make them fly longer routes like A340 or B777-200ER.
The larger wing and more powerful engines were being offset by larger passengers count and capability.

I mean surely if the current B787-9 is more efficient on shorter routes, almost all airlines would order it compared to A330-900neo.
 
eamondzhang
Posts: 1803
Joined: Thu Sep 23, 2010 8:23 am

Re: Is there a Business Case for a 787-9 regional

Thu Aug 06, 2020 11:48 pm

A300neo wrote:
@eamondzhang
Most pax operators in Asia have ditched 767s, and A330s/A350s/787s are doing sub-3hr flight across the region on a daily basis

Of course, the simple reason for that is that there is no new wide-body with modern engines. Hence, the only possibility is to "abuse" long-range planes for these connections. SIA flew a lot of A300 and A310 20 years ago. When they wanted to modernize their fleet they wanted Airbus to build an A330 with the A300 wings, it was called A330-100. Airbus considered it, but then offered only a so called "A330-500", which only had a shortened fuselage but still featured the heavy wings of the A330/340. Hence SIA told them "No, thanks" and ordered a mixture of B772 and B737 instead.

@2175301:
Thanks for the information.

If you bother doing some search you'll realise what you are saying regarding SIA is not factual in anyway.

Firstly, SIA's A300 was dead long before the carrier ordered any 777s (mid-1980s). SIA ordered its first batch of 777 in December 1995 (as per this PR relase: https://boeing.mediaroom.com/1999-12-23 ... 777-200ERs and Boeing's O&D). By then SIlkAir has taken all but one 737-300s and all were leased from lessor, including the fateful 9V-TRF. The fleet were removed by 1999 and replaced by A320s. Silk Air never placed an order for 737s until 2012 when it selected 737-800 and 737MAX but that's an entirely different story here.

And let's not forget SIA operated a fleet of 17 A340-300s for a while before withdrawing them due to performance issue (weight limitation on flights to Europe).

Michael

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