Leahy Surprised As A330 Makes Comeback!

EI321 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:47 pm

Quote:
Airbus chief salesman John Leahy admitted yesterday that even he was taken by surprise by the remarkable resurgence in sales this year of the company’s Airbus A330 product line.

The company has already committed to increasing A330/A340 production to nine per month by 2009 and it is likely to hit an all-time high of 10 per month. The move has been fuelled by an influx of commitments for the A330, led by Hong Kong Airlines’ memorandum of understanding for 20 aircraft and AirAsia X’s order for 15.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...prised-as-a330-makes-comeback.html

Looks like its turning out to be a nice year for the A330.

Quote:
He says: “We were surprised at needing to go to 8-10 aircraft per month. Now we understand what is happening. I think we will keep the A330 at 10 per month for a long while.” The A330, he claims, competes well with the Boeing 787 for carriers focusing on capacity because although “it will burn a little more fuel” it is cheaper to acquire and provides as many as 30 more seats per aircraft.

I wonder will we see some A330 orders announced this week.

scouseflyer · Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:55 pm

Quoting EI321 (Thread starter):
I wonder will we see some A330 orders announced this week.

I'd guess so - maybe Hong Kong will firm theirs?

kl911 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 9:56 pm

Maybe we'll see another KLM follow-up order? It just doesn't make sense that all but one 330 is delivered, with the last one schuled for 2008...

Or the BA order for interim 767 replacements?

KL911

columba · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:00 pm

Quoting KL911 (Reply 2):
Or the BA order for interim 767 replacements?

That would explain why he is so surprised.... Smile

XT6Wagon · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:12 pm

Sometimes I think Leahy would be surprised by a sunrise.

He has thus far managed to be wrong about the A340NG, A380, 787, 748, A330E, A350 Mk1-V (and possibly counting)

So maybe its good that Leahy managed to be wrong on the A330, just this time his being wrong was in Airbus's interest.

scouseflyer · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:16 pm

Quoting Columba (Reply 3):
That would explain why he is so surprised....

He'd be even more suprised if they got the USAF tanker order Big grin

SAS A340 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:16 pm

Well,the day BA orders a WB from Airbus gonna be a great day for some people..... goodvibes

kl911 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:22 pm

Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 6):
Well,the day BA orders a WB from Airbus gonna be a great day for some people.....

It's not if anymore, but when....

SAS A340 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:23 pm

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 5):
He'd be even more suprised if they got the USAF tanker order

Makes two of us. Wink

SAS A340 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:25 pm

Quoting KL911 (Reply 7):
It's not if anymore, but when....

Was just about to edit my post with that,so true.

scouseflyer · Mon Sep 03, 2007 10:25 pm

Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 8):
Makes two of us.

3 of us - I'd be gob-smacked!

Stitch · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:02 pm

Like the A330, I think reports of the 777's death are exaggerated. Even if the A350 meets all her targets, the 77L and 77W should still see strong sales thanks to availability, price, extra seating capacity and performance (if the A330 can overcome a double-digit fuel burn penalty vs. the 787, the 777 should be able to do so vs. the A350).

[Edited 2007-09-03 16:03:24]

JPair · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:15 pm

I think the A330 is an attractive proposition for airlines and will remain so until at least 2010. No other aircraft in its category is currently available. 787/350 are sold out until 2013 or later, the 767 is old news, and the 777 is more expensive.

bobnwa · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:15 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
He has thus far managed to be wrong about the A340NG, A380, 787, 748, A330E, A350 Mk1-V (and possibly counting)

You mean like Boeing with the 747-300, 717,737-600, 767-400 and Sonic Cruiser. both Boeing and Airbus have been wrong in the past on occasion and will continue to be. They have also been very right on occasion and will continue to be.

seabosdca · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:19 pm

Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 6):
Well,the day BA orders a WB from Airbus gonna be a great day for some people...

I'd be hugely surprised if BA does not order the A380. The real question is if they are willing to go back on their previous comments and become a launch customer for the A350. Without confirmation of any HGW 787 variants from Boeing, the A350 is the best aircraft out there for replacing their 772s... but they would have to be among the first to get it.

panam330 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:19 pm

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 16):
767-400

For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically, and has filled it's role quite well. It was not a dud. End of story.

SAS A340 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:21 pm

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 16):
You mean like Boeing with the 747-300, 717,737-600, 767-400 and Sonic Cruiser. both Boeing and Airbus have been wrong in the past on occasion and will continue to be. They have also been very right on occasion and will continue to be.

Well spoken!! checkmark

BlueSky1976 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:35 pm

Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 18):
For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically, and has filled it's role quite well. It was not a dud. End of story.

For a thousandth time: it failed miserably against A330-200. Boeing built it as a competitor, instead everyone opted for a more capable plane. Only CO and DL ended up taking it. The commercial failure of 767-400 was the main reason Boeing started 7E7 study in 2000.

767-400 being built exclusively for DL and CO is probably one of the biggest a.net myths.

[Edited 2007-09-03 16:37:05]

[Edited 2007-09-03 16:38:04]

[Edited 2007-09-03 16:45:10]

futurecaptain · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:40 pm

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 16):
717

The 717 was not a Boeing design. They just took over building it.

RedChili · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:42 pm

Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 18):
For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically,

Well, if Continental and Delta are the only airlines in the world...

From Boeing:

"In response to market interest, the Boeing Board of Directors has authorized the Commercial Airplane Group to offer a proposed 767-400ERX for sale to the world's airlines..."

"This new 767-400ERX brings significant improvements in operating economics over airplanes offered by our competitors..."

http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/1997/news.release.970106.html

Stitch · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:44 pm

Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 18):
For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically, and has filled it's role quite well. It was not a dud. End of story.

For the thousandth time, it only appealed to two customers and it was a dud. With 38 orders, Boeing might have recovered the development costs (since they were said to be "very low"), but Boeing intended to sell at least a few hundred of them.

slz396 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:46 pm

Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 18):
For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically, and has filled it's role quite well. It was not a dud. End of story.

ROTFL

Seems like some people still think that by repeating this twisted view over and over again, they will manage to change reality.

Get over it:

When it became clear to Boeing the Airbus A330 was hugely superior to the 767-300ER and their 777-200 was far too heavy/expensive to be seen as real alternative, Boeing decided to try to counter the A330 with a dramatic rework of their 767-300ER and came up with the 767-400..

Boeing pushed the design very hard in the press, at airshows and in all tenders, heck, they've even sent it on a world tour, but finally managed to convince only 3 customers, 2 with a 'Buy Boeing only policy' and Kenia Airways, the latter one pulling out of the contract before they took delivery of a single model.

If you think the 764 filled its role quite well, then I don't know what idea of Boeing you have: Spending billions of dollars and thousands of man years on a program with the purpose to satisfy the need of only 2 customers, while at the same time deliberately refusing to spend that same money, time and effort on something better which would obviously be in much greater demand definitely isn't good business practice and so I refuse to accept Boeing decided to do just that (which is what you are insinuating here).

The 767-400 was a good plane, no doubt about it, but it was simply not good enough in the light of competition. It is Boeing's personal A350nonXWB so to speak, but they made the mistake to actually built it. No big deal though, Boeing moved on, just as Airbus has, so I wonder why some people here can't do so as well?

bobnwa · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:47 pm

Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 18):
For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically, and has filled it's role quite well. It was not a dud. End of story.

You can say it two thousand times, but the fact remains it was a marketing and financial failure. End of the right story.

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 21):

The 717 was not a Boeing design. They just took over building it

Never said it was a Boeing design, but they built it and sold it, so in most peoples minds it is a Boeing

EI321 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:48 pm

Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 18):
Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 16):
767-400

For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically, and has filled it's role quite well. It was not a dud. End of story.

Ahh good to see the 'oul a.net 767-400 myth is not dead yet Wink

Even DL & CO reduced their 767-400ER on realisation that the aircraft was a sales turkey, and the rest of the customers all canceled. Boeing then tried to introduce several improvements like a new cockpit to attract more customers. An A380-style world tour followed. Many airlines evaluated the aircraft. None ordered it.

Quote:

"We weren't getting a lot of enquiries or requests for -400ERs," says ILFC assistant vice-president marketing, Marty Olson. "We haven't seen the demand."

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-400er-commitments-after-poor.html

Boeings man in charge of the project at the time is quoted in www.flightglobal.com as saying that they (Boeing) expect the aircraft to be, quote, 'a best seller'. Now since the A330-200 was and still is the 767-400ER's closest competitor, I take it that by the term 'best seller', he was implying that the aircraft would outsell the A330-200.

BlueSky1976 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:49 pm

Quoting Bobnwa (Reply 25):
You can say it two thousand times, but the fact remains it was a marketing and financial failure. End of the right story.

Marketing - yes. Financial - no.

dl767captain · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:54 pm

by orders is he counting the orders of people that got it at an extremely low price that was almost given to them because of A380 delays and A350 incentives, i don't really consider that an order

slz396 · Mon Sep 03, 2007 11:55 pm

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 27):
Financial - no.

Remains to be seen:

NO if you only consider the sunk costs of the program.

YES if you take into account the 50% market share Boeing could have captured and simply gave away to Airbus and their A332.

PlaneHunter · Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:10 am

Quoting PanAm330 (Reply 18):

For the thousandth time, it was built for two customers (DL and CO) specifically, and has filled it's role quite well. It was not a dud. End of story.

Some myths never die...

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 28):
by orders is he counting the orders of people that got it at an extremely low price that was almost given to them because of A380 delays and A350 incentives, i don't really consider that an order

And have you actually checked how many of the recent A330 customers ever had A380s or A350s on order?

PH

Crosswind · Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:14 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 26):
Boeings man in charge of the project at the time is quoted in www.flightglobal.com as saying that they (Boeing) expect the aircraft to be, quote, 'a best seller'. Now since the A330-200 was and still is the 767-400ER's closest competitor, I take it that by the term 'best seller', he was implying that the aircraft would outsell the A330-200.

Exactly. Here is the quote by the Chief Project Engineer at the time (1998);

By this month, sales had reached 52 aircraft, with 26 orders for Continental, 21 for Delta and five for International Lease Finance. Although it has been static for some time, the orderbook is widely tipped to grow before the end of 1998. Queen says that there is "significant interest in the programme", and he adds that "we still expect it to be a best seller". If the last two decades of 767 history are anything to go by, he may be proved right.

Full article from Flight Global

So 9 years ago there were 52 orders, as things stand CO only took 16 aircraft, Delta took all 21 and there is 1 further unidentified order for a dissapointing total of 38.

The only built for CO/DL argument is something that has reared it's head only on the pages of the airliners.net forums, and to buy the argument you have to ignore the aborted 767-400ERX programme, and forget about how Boeing talked up the whole programme at the time - as well as the cancelled Continental, ILFC and Kenya Airways orders.

Regards
CROSSWIND

scbriml · Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:23 am

Quoting Futurecaptain (Reply 21):
The 717 was not a Boeing design. They just took over building it.

Well, if Boeing is going to claim all of MD's historical products as their own, it would seem only fair that they take the bad stuff as well! wink

EI321 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:32 am

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 28):
DL767captain

I reserve it for special posts, and that post deserves a wave of EI321's Bu11Sh1t flag ................ white

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 28):
by orders is he counting the orders of people that got it at an extremely low price that was almost given to them because of A380 delays

I was not aware that these airlines have had their A380's delayed:

AIRBUS A330-200
Aercap x 10
Avianca x 10
Etihad x 4
Egyptair x 5
AIRBUS A330-200F
Avion Aircraft Trading x 8
Flyington x 12
Guggenheim x 6
MNG Cargo x 2
Intrepid x 20
Aircastle x 15
Etihad x 3
AIRBUS A330-300
Etihad x 1
Fly Asian Xpress x 15
Thai International x 8

Hey wait a minute ......... Yeah sure

Nice try

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 28):
and A350 incentives

I was not aware that these airlines have ordered the A350:

AIRBUS A330-200
Aercap x 10
Avianca x 10
Etihad x 4
Egyptair x 5
AIRBUS A330-200F
Avion Aircraft Trading x 8
Flyington x 12
Guggenheim x 6
MNG Cargo x 2
Intrepid x 20
Aircastle x 15
Etihad x 3
AIRBUS A330-300
Etihad x 1
Fly Asian Xpress x 15
Thai International x 8

Hey wait a minute ......... Yeah sure

Nice try

Danny · Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:36 am

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 28):
by orders is he counting the orders of people that got it at an extremely low price that was almost given to them because of A380 delays and A350 incentives, i don't really consider that an order

I would consider $80m for an A330 be good price for Airbus considering Boeing was selling 787 this year at $90m.

PanAm1971 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:47 am

The A350 is still a long way away (and still in flux). As we know 787 production slots are full up. Cue the A330. Why not?

EI321 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:16 am

Quoting PanAm1971 (Reply 36):
The A350 is still a long way away (and still in flux). As we know 787 production slots are full up. Cue the A330. Why not?

Your saying that the A330 is getting orders an an interim for the 787? Looking at which airliner have ordered A330's this year, I only know of one airline (Avianca) that has ordered both the 787 and A350 in this fashion recently and it has emerged that they actually are going to keep their A330's. We do know however that a few airlines are ordering A330's before their A350's arrive. Singapore, TAP and Aer Lingus are examples.

Its like saying ''as we know A350 slots are still a long way away, so cue the 787''.

PanAm1971 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 1:39 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 37):
Your saying that the A330 is getting orders an an interim for the 787? Looking at which airliner have ordered A330's this year, I only know of one airline (Avianca) that has ordered both the 787 and A350 in this fashion recently and it has emerged that they actually are going to keep their A330's. We do know however that a few airlines are ordering A330's before their A350's arrive. Singapore, TAP and Aer Lingus are examples.

Its like saying ''as we know A350 slots are still a long way away, so cue the 787''.

I think you may have missed the gist of my post. If I'm an airline that needs capacity sooner, rather than later, the A330 is a very good, very economical choice. Sometimes you can't wait for the very best product to appear. You have to go with what is going to make you a profit and pay the bills. It's not necessarily an "interim solution." It may be a long term solution. Perhaps, at some future point, it will be a decision to be revisited. Perhaps not. But going with the A330 instead of waiting for either 787 or A350 may well make sense to many airlines. I'm surprised that Leahy is surprised. Not everyone can wait for the next "best thing."

dl767captain · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:00 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 34):
I reserve it for special posts, and that post deserves a wave of EI321's Bu11Sh1t flag ................

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 28):
by orders is he counting the orders of people that got it at an extremely low price that was almost given to them because of A380 delays

I was not aware that these airlines have had their A380's delayed:

AIRBUS A330-200
Aercap x 10
Avianca x 10
Etihad x 4
Egyptair x 5
AIRBUS A330-200F
Avion Aircraft Trading x 8
Flyington x 12
Guggenheim x 6
MNG Cargo x 2
Intrepid x 20
Aircastle x 15
Etihad x 3
AIRBUS A330-300
Etihad x 1
Fly Asian Xpress x 15
Thai International x 8

Hey wait a minute ......... Nice try

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 28):
and A350 incentives

I was not aware that these airlines have ordered the A350:

AIRBUS A330-200
Aercap x 10
Avianca x 10
Etihad x 4
Egyptair x 5
AIRBUS A330-200F
Avion Aircraft Trading x 8
Flyington x 12
Guggenheim x 6
MNG Cargo x 2
Intrepid x 20
Aircastle x 15
Etihad x 3
AIRBUS A330-300
Etihad x 1
Fly Asian Xpress x 15
Thai International x 8

Hey wait a minute ......... Nice try

i'm not saying all of them did this, but does no one remember that since the A380 was delayed a few times that Aribus offered compensations and some of those were A330's not to mention they sold A330's very cheap as an incentive for the A350?

kc135topboom · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:17 am

Quoting KL911 (Reply 7):
Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 6):
Well,the day BA orders a WB from Airbus gonna be a great day for some people.....

It's not if anymore, but when....

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 10):
Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 8):
Makes two of us.

3 of us - I'd be gob-smacked!

Wow, you guys jknow for sure what the big BA order will be? Oh, tell us, please...... pray

Quoting EI321 (Reply 12):
If you think John Leahy is expressing his innermost personal opinion on matters such as those above you will probably believe me when I tell you that Baywatch was a documentary.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):
Get over it:

When it became clear to Boeing the Airbus A330 was hugely superior to the 767-300ER and their 777-200 was far too heavy/expensive to be seen as real alternative, Boeing decided to try to counter the A330 with a dramatic rework of their 767-300ER and came up with the 767-400..

Revisionest history?

In the 1990s (which is what you are talking about), the A-330 was a dud. The B-767-300ER was outselling it some 3:1, the (then new) B-777-200/-200ER did, and still out sells it to this day. The A-330 is no longer a dud. Airbus has sold almost as many as they have given away (because of the A-380 delimma).

bobnwa · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:24 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
The A-330 is no longer a dud. Airbus has sold almost as many as they have given away (because of the A-380 delimma).

Isn't that a gross exaggeration?

PlaneHunter · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:28 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
The B-767-300ER was outselling it some 3:1,

Are you referring to the significantly larger A333?

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
the (then new) B-777-200/-200ER did, and still out sells it to this day.

Which one now exactly? Be careful with mixing up all the different versions.

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
Airbus has sold almost as many as they have given away (because of the A-380 delimma).

Have you checked Airbus' books recently so that you can present us such an odd conclusion?

PH

worldtraveler · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:28 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 20):

For a thousandth time: it failed miserably against A330-200. Boeing built it as a competitor, instead everyone opted for a more capable plane. Only CO and DL ended up taking it. The commercial failure of 767-400 was the main reason Boeing started 7E7 study in 2000.

Boeing pushed the 767 as far as it could go. The 764 couldn't compete against the 330. But remember that the 767 had amassed nearly 1000 orders before the 330 became a commerically viable aircraft - and the 330 didn't even begin service until well into the 767s life.

It is better for Boeing and Airbus if their products do not directly compete either in capabillities or time of availability.

Airbus will likely continue to enjoy success with the 330 family but Boeing is selling 777s and 787s at a very brisk as well.

The market is big enough for both players - even though some products from both companies will be economically "inferior" to products from the other company. Global aviation is growing fast enough that there will be a demand for all types of modern airliners.

Morvious · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:31 am

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 39):
i'm not saying all of them did this, but does no one remember that since the A380 was delayed a few times that Aribus offered compensations and some of those were A330's

There are customers that did get a good deal from Airbus because of the delays. But instead of dumping Airbus they ordered by a good price extra aircrafts. You can say what you want but instead of loosing a customer, they just sold more planes.

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 39):
not to mention they sold A330's very cheap as an incentive for the A350?

So, you are selling the A330 at a good price just to nail a customer who will buy the A350 later from you. Thats called doing buisness so why can't you coun't these orders?

Quoting KL911 (Reply 2):
Maybe we'll see another KLM follow-up order? It just doesn't make sense that all but one 330 is delivered, with the last one schuled for 2008...

Yeah, I am hoping that as well.

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 5):
He'd be even more suprised if they got the USAF tanker order

Who isn't haha.

gilesdavies · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:32 am

Children, Children!!! Lets all be friends and kiss and make up! kiss

Did I misread, I thought the forum is called "Leahy Surprised As A330 Makes Comeback!" and NOT "Why is the 767-400 so shit!..." (etc...) Wink

Back to the case in hand...

I am so pleased to see the A330 doing so well, but really comes as no surprise!

I just wish Airbus had focused on the A330 earlier on in it's life, and had dropped the connection with the A340. I think a longer range product would have helped push sales further, and maybe also a higher capacity version. But with both of these, I am not sure if there had been enough ground clearance for the engines. Unfortunately they focused both these products on the A340.

I think we are going to see plenty more orders to come, and many of these aircrafts will come from repeat customers with a smaller long haul fleets. This has happened with Aer Lingus and BMI, where they are already happy with the product and as they have a small fleet, they do not want the complication of adding another aircraft type - which can be a large investment in its own right. I think SAS will be another one doing this shortly, have a reasonably small fleet and already happy with the efficiency of the aircraft.

ncelhr · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:35 am

Always pleasant to see a good ol' "my aircraft is better than yours" war. banghead

Oh, hang on, do any of you own an A330 or a B764?

Every day that I read those a.net wars, I feel there is some hidden talent out there.
You guys should work for Boeing & Airbus! Such devotion! biggrin

Oh, I get it, you all actually work for the manufacturers! Nice job!
duck

Myself? Oh, I'm a 747SP dude...

vfw614 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:36 am

How about turning our attention away from the Boeing 767-400 to the Boeing 757-300 ? Surprised nobody has mentioned this mega-seller so far.... Smile

The A330-200 is doing nicely by all accounts and much better than almost everybody would have thought two years ago.

slz396 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:43 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 40):
In the 1990s (which is what you are talking about), the A-330 was a dud. The B-767-300ER was outselling it some 3:1.

Have a look at 'number of new customers' rather than 'ordered copies', it will give you a better idea of reality.

The fact a handful of loyal Boeing customers buy planes in large numbers is a fact which has distorted many sales contests and has fooled Boeing into believing they were still offering competitive products at a time when they were not even close from doing so, several times. Boeing has finally understood there are other more interesting parameters to look at that the naked sales numbers, maybe it is time for you to do the same?

As soon as the A330 became 'known' it steadily won more new customers than the 767, whereas the 767 soldiered on for a very long time, mainly because of existing customers ordering more. An order is an order indeed, but important and even decisive long term market trends like preference for a specific plane can be derived NOT from the naked order numbers, but from analyzing them: number of customers, and more importantly even number of NEW customers, give far more information on where the future will bring you.

Also, why bring the 777-2ER into a discussion on the A330?

The natural competitor of the A330-200 is the 767-3ER and the 767-4ER.
and the 777-200 for tha A330-300.
Both the 777-200 and the 767-3ER are officially declared brain dead, whereas the 767-4ER was even dead upon arrival.

It is a hard conclusion, but it is the conclusion Boeing came to some time ago, because why do you think they decided to aim their next new program exactly at this segment?

Flying-Tiger · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:44 am

I´m a bit surprised that nobody has mentioned the two really interesting pieces in this article:

1. Flight indicates that Lufthansa has placed an order for the A330 this year; this appears to be the rumoured but still not officially confirmed deal for 9 -300s for Swiss. In addition ILFC apparently has placed an A330 order in August as so far they haven´t placed any Airbus order this year. Same seems to be true for bmi - rumoured but not confirmed so far. Might be a very interesting August report.

Quote:
Other A330 customers this year include Lufthansa, Egyptair, BMI, Thai Airways, Aeroflot and lessors like ILFC and AerCap. There have also been big deals for the A330-200F freighter.

The second interesting part is the A330-300F study on the request of parcel carriers, IMO especially FedEx as DC-10 replacement and UPS for a growth plattform. Plus I wouldn´t rule out one of the Indian carriers.

Quote:
Leahy also confirms that Airbus is continuing to study the feasibility of a freighter version of the A330-300 at the urging of the parcel carriers, and says that is the next likely development of the family.

Might be a very cheap addition to the A330 family, plus it lays the foundation for an A340-300 conversion program, which might not be too far off.

EI321 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:46 am

Quoting DL767captain (Reply 39):
i'm not saying all of them did this, but does no one remember that since the A380 was delayed a few times that Aribus offered compensations and some of those were A330's not to mention they sold A330's very cheap as an incentive for the A350?

Not this I agree with, although the case points are both speculative and few & far between. One thing that I can tell you is taht Airbus (or Boeing) has never given aircraft away for free. There's was speculation in the thai media that they were to get the 8 A330's for about $80m a pop as part of the A380 compo (this is where the A330's for $80m theory comes from), but then the airline were idealogically forced by the govt to lease the aircraft instead.

Quoting Gilesdavies (Reply 45):
I just wish Airbus had focused on the A330 earlier on in it's life, and had dropped the connection with the A340.

But that was not a practical proposition, because the A330 cant be physically brought up to the range cababilitys of the A340 and still remain a two engine aircraft. The A340's and A330's serve different segments of the market, just as the 777A and 777ER do. Even if we look at the A345/6, the basic design could not be pushed to a 777 sized twin, while keeping the weight down and using only two engines. Airbus took a trade off between an all new ($8b?) design which would still just be on a par with the 777, and a cheaper ($2.9b) derivitave.

seabosdca · Tue Sep 04, 2007 3:51 am

Quoting Vfw614 (Reply 47):
the Boeing 757-300 ? Surprised nobody has mentioned this mega-seller so far...

The situation there is a little different... the 764 was simply outclassed by the A332, but no one has yet built (or proposed to build) anything that will perform remotely as well as the 753 on its ideal mission. It just suffered from 1) bad market timing and 2) the fact that its ideal mission is not the most common.

If you have 250 economy pax to carry less than 2000 nm, nothing anywhere will do the job even close to as cheaply as a 753. Today's 753 operators would all jump at the chance to acquire more, and I bet most charter operators would too. It's a fantastic aircraft.

Fairchild24 · Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:15 am

Quoting Gilesdavies (Reply 45):
I think SAS will be another one doing this shortly, have a reasonably small fleet and already happy with the efficiency of the aircraft.

Dear Sir

Only if they solve the engine problem
The RR engine on the SAS 330 is not performing as they should.

Cheers

Göran

virtual · Tue Sep 04, 2007 4:31 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 20):
For a thousandth time: it failed miserably against A330-200. Boeing built it as a competitor, instead everyone opted for a more capable plane. Only CO and DL ended up taking it. The commercial failure of 767-400 was the main reason Boeing started 7E7 study in 2000. 767-400 being built exclusively for DL and CO is probably one of the biggest a.net myths.

I agree. I got to go onboard Boeing's 767-400 demonstrator at Farnborough in 2000 and it was full of Boeing promotional displays comparing it against the A330-200. They were trying very hard to promote as a competitor to the A330-200.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net