Air France Splits Widebody Order

n1786b · Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:42 pm

A350-900 25 firm + 35 options - deliveries starting in 2018
787 25 firm + 23 options + 10 already leased from ILFC for KLM Deliveries starting in 2016

In order to compensate for the 10 787s leased by KLM, AF decided to bump up the number of A350 options so Boeing wouldn't be seen as "winning" this order - not my saying, it is in the French ( En augmentant le nombre d'Airbus commandés, Air France-KLM évite que Boeing puisse apparaître comme le gagnant de la commande.)

The CEO is on record saying the following about the political pressure to favor Airbus: "We listened to it, heard what was said, but I feel it really didn't influence our decision"

« Les pressions nous les avons écoutées, entendues mais je n'ai pas le sentiment qu'elles pèsent sur notre décision »

Les Echos says the A350s will replace the A340s and 777-200s, and the first 787s will replace KLMs MD-11s.

http://www.lesechos.fr/entreprises-s...-entre-boeing-et-airbus-219908.php

http://www.latribune.fr/journal/edit...m-commande-110-long-courriers.html

seabosdca · Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:46 pm

Neither source says which type of 787. 787-9s would be more appropriate as MD-11 replacements, but ILFC's orders are overwhelmingly for 787-8s.

The A359 is tailor-made for AF, IMO. As a nice bonus, this puts paid to all the yammering about AF being GE-only.

shamrock604 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:47 pm

Quoting n1786b (Thread starter):
The CEO is on record saying the following about the political pressure to favor Airbus: "We listened to it, heard what was said, but I feel it really didn't influence our decision"

With such a vast 777 fleet, I dont think anyone can accuse AF of not buying the aircraft that best suits their needs.

breiz · Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:49 pm

It will be interesting to see if the comments are as understanding as for the American Airlines order.

EPA001 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:54 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 1):
As a nice bonus, this puts paid to all the yammering about AF being GE-only

That "ban" (if there ever was one) has now been broken.

Overall the number are no surprise to anyone. On the B787 order the break-up (if there is one) between B788 and B789 could be interesting. But I guess they might go for all B789's and no B788. Just my

ikramerica · Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:58 pm

This order was for Airbus to lose, but the A358 is such a dog that there was no choice but to buy the 787 to replace the smaller aircraft at KLM. The GE powered A359 is a nice 772 replacement though.

AF will still likely go with the GE9X powered 77X later on, as the 77Ws will need replacing and the RR only A351 will have a tough fight.

U2380 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 8:59 pm

Quoting breiz (Reply 3):
It will be interesting to see if the comments are as understanding as for the American Airlines order.

How dare they! In a time when they should be supporting European workers, AF is stabbing us in the back...

Only joking of course! Good order for both Airbus, Boeing and AF-KLM. This sets them up with a highly efficient long haul fleet for the foreseeable future.

ikramerica · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:12 pm

Quoting U2380 (Reply 6):
How dare they! In a time when they should be supporting European workers, AF is stabbing us in the back...

I don't recall that being a talking point re: the AA order. It is, however, a major factor in the EU, and AF/KLM admitted as such. Every time AF chooses non-Airbus products, they lose political goodwill. And political goodwill is a valuable commodity. This is the main reason that all major flag carriers in the EU choose A320s. They planes are too similar to the 737NG to make it worth fighting over politically. KL was the only legacy holdout (maybe as political payback for Fokker being allowed to die by EU decision makers in favor of Airbus), but expect them to take the NEO as well now that AF is involved.

fcogafa · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:16 pm

Presumably, being larger, the cost of an A350 is greater than a B787 so the order isn't really equal...unless some discounting has been done to even it up!

shamrock604 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:19 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 7):
This is the main reason that all major flag carriers in the EU choose A320s. They planes are too similar to the 737NG to make it worth fighting over politically. KL was the only legacy holdout (maybe as political payback for Fokker being allowed to die by EU decision makers in favor of Airbus), but expect them to take the NEO as well now that AF is involved.

Maybe it's just a better aircraft that passengers prefer?

U2380 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:21 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 7):
I don't recall that being a talking point re: the AA order.

There was defiantly a lot of: 'AA are traitors and are putting American workers out of jobs' or words to that effect.

Anyway, as I said I was joking. I don't agree with the EU/French Governments applying pressure on AF to buy Airbus, it's my belief that Airlines should buy the right aircraft for their needs.

As a side note however, members of congress in the US also apply similar pressures on US airlines. I'll try and find a link..

Edit- Unfortunately the only thing I could find to back myself up is this comment from Wikipedia

"A series of cables show how US diplomats and senior politicians intervene on behalf of Boeing to help boost the company's sales."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content...ates_diplomatic_cables_leak#Boeing

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/03/bu...ikileaks-boeing.html?_r=2&emc=eta1

[Edited 2011-09-15 14:27:26]

[Edited 2011-09-15 14:41:43]

[Edited 2011-09-15 14:45:47]

seabosdca · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:21 pm

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 8):
Presumably, being larger, the cost of an A350 is greater than a B787 so the order isn't really equal...unless some discounting has been done to even it up!

Then again, the 787 has 35 firm (counting the ILFC birds), while the A350 only has 25 firm. To me, that's a win for the 787.

ferpe · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:23 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 5):
The GE powered A359 is a nice 772 replacement though.

Think you dreaming a bit or do you anticipate an announcement tomorrow of a GE participation in the 350 program?

redflyer · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:25 pm

And the A350-1000 is again left out in the cold...

SASMD82 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:27 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 7):
don't recall that being a talking point re: the AA order. It is, however, a major factor in the EU, and AF/KLM admitted as such. Every time AF chooses non-Airbus products, they lose political goodwill. And political goodwill is a valuable commodity. This is the main reason that all major flag carriers in the EU choose A320s. They planes are too similar to the 737NG to make it worth fighting over politically. KL was the only legacy holdout (maybe as political payback for Fokker being allowed to die by EU decision makers in favor of Airbus), but expect them to take the NEO as well now that AF is involved.

Though partly right,

I assume this happens in North America too. Beside AA, Virgin, Hawaiin, US Airways, Air Canada and JetBlue, no airlines order Airbus products (Delta got them from NW but I do not expect them to order Airbus planes). So United, Delta, Southwest, Allegiant, Alaska are the only Airbus operators. Airbus wide body operators in North America? Delta (they got them from NW), US, Hawaian and Air Canada. That's it..... How many long haul planes made by Boeing are flown by European airlines?? Many more than Airbus widebodies fly in North America. Subjectif!

The whole economy in the Netherlands relies on the US. If there will happen something annoying to the American economy the Dutch stock exchange plunges deeper than any other stock exchange. KLM will do like any other Dutch business: go the US first (because of the billateral agreements). Other countries rely more at neighbouring countries. Did you know that all the money that is earned within the Eurozone 80% is earned by 'domestic' trade? Like in the US, isn't it?

The A320 might be a good option if you operate with a hub and spoke system. They have a palletised underbelly which is very useful when you have transfering passengers. It also has more comfort than the B737NG and about the same legs as the B737NG. I think you must agree, don't you?

lightsaber · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:27 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 1):
As a nice bonus, this puts paid to all the yammering about AF being GE-only.

Thus I wonder. GE could make an A358 or A359 engine, but not economically scale the GEnX core to the A350-1000.

Note: I'm only playing devil's advocate. I don't seem to be the only one with the opinion *not* to rule out GE

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 5):
The GE powered A359 is a nice 772 replacement though.

I would note, I'm not excited about the current A350-1000. Not at all; if I were more excited about the latest version of the A350-1000, I would rule out GE. I am excited about the A359 and there should be enough of a market here for GE. Until I see an official engine order, I will suspect GE is doing a 'dark horse' here.

Lightsaber

Tigerguy · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:38 pm

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
Beside AA, Virgin, Hawaiin, US Airways, Air Canada and JetBlue, no airlines order Airbus products

Frontier and Spirit have sizeable Airbus fleets, and United has the A350 on order.

But back to AF/KL, they seem to have ordered the products that they feel will serve them in the best way going forward. I congratulate them on their order and wish them well!

Stitch · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:38 pm

So this order tracks as rumors had it in terms of firm orders, with a bump in options for the A350-900.

Quoting fcogafa (Reply 8):
Presumably, being larger, the cost of an A350 is greater than a B787 so the order isn't really equal...unless some discounting has been done to even it up!

Don't know if they did it for this order, but Airbus has at times tailored their RFP price with the A350XWB to match Boeing's RFP price on the 787 with mixed success at securing the business.

[Edited 2011-09-15 14:40:29]

PlanesNTrains · Thu Sep 15, 2011 9:43 pm

Quoting U2380 (Reply 10):
There was defiantly a lot of: 'AA are traitors and are putting American workers out of jobs' or words to that effect.

Define "a lot".

Two or three members don't make "a lot".

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
I assume this happens in North America too. Beside AA, Virgin, Hawaiin, US Airways, Air Canada and JetBlue, no airlines order Airbus products (Delta got them from NW but I do not expect them to order Airbus planes).

Spirit? Frontier? As for United, they have plenty of Airbus planes in their fleet so to say "never" or "doesn't" would seem somewhat gratuitous. Ditto Delta.

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
So United, Delta, Southwest, Allegiant, Alaska are the only Airbus operators.

Not sure what this part was supposed to mean, as United and Delta are Airbus operators but the others aren't.

Maybe it'd be good to list the carriers that aren't Airbus operators in North America. While not definitive nor all-inclusive:

Alaska, Southwest, Allegiant, WestJet....probably a few of the Mexican carriers and some smaller US operators. The rest seem to order Airbus [too]. Discounting Delta would seem premature, whether you'd like to ignore NW or not. I fully expect them to order from both manufacturers moving forward.

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
Airbus wide body operators in North America? Delta (they got them from NW), US, Hawaian and Air Canada.

Maybe we can list the non-Airbus widebody operators in the US:

AA (had the A300 for many years), Aeromexico?...others?

The way I see it, the number of operators that eschew Airbus in North America is pretty small.

-Dave

U2380 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:02 pm

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 18):
Define "a lot". Two or three members don't make "a lot".

Maybe a slight exaggeration, but there was much discussion on the topic, with them two or three members reiterating their views more than once

Back on topic. Where does this leave the AF long haul fleet once all their new orders are delivered?

A380
B777
B787
A350
A330? Or are the 787's there replacement?

Anything else I've missed?

[Edited 2011-09-15 15:04:13]

EddieDude · Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:12 pm

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 18):
Maybe we can list the non-Airbus widebody operators in the US:

AA (had the A300 for many years), Aeromexico?...others?

Well, AM is a Mexican airline, not a U.S. ariline. And AM does not operate one single Airbus. It has an all-Boeing mainline fleet and an all-Embraer regional fleet.

747400sp · Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:28 pm

Quoting shamrock604 (Reply 2):
With such a vast 777 fleet, I dont think anyone can accuse AF of not buying the aircraft that best suits their needs.

You are right, AF has bought a large amout of Boeing planes.

ebbuk · Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:36 pm

My best friend (

) Ikramerica may not have been at all polite, as is his prerogative, when he called the A350-800 " a dog". It is a concern that many are opting away from it. And no order from AF. Pity.

Equally worrying is the A350-1000. No new sales yet, nothing from AF. Though whether they need to replace their 77Ws just yet could be a factor.

As is typical with our French friends, they are patriotic when it suits. Glad it suited for them to get a few Airbus widebodies. Not a bad day. Could have been worse.

EPA001 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:38 pm

Quoting redflyer (Reply 13):
And the A350-1000 is again left out in the cold...

With the B77W's they have being so new, and they still have some on order, the A350-1000 was never going to be a part of this order.

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
The whole economy in the Netherlands relies on the US

What happens in Germany is even more important to the Dutch economy, but the Dutch-US ties are indeed also very important to our economy.

seabosdca · Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:46 pm

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 15):
I would note, I'm not excited about the current A350-1000.

Curious why... do you think it's poorly conceived (not enough benefit compared to the 77W or future 777 derivatives), or do you think it's going to be difficult or impossible to execute as planned?

Quoting U2380 (Reply 19):
Back on topic. Where does this leave the AF long haul fleet once all their new orders are delivered?

AF: 788, 359, 77W, 388
KL: 788, 333, 789 (?), 77W

Not sure how long the 332s will stick around at either airline; they could well also remain in the fleet.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 22):
My best friend ( ) Ikramerica may not have been at all polite, as is his prerogative, when he called the A350-800 " a dog"

It is a dog, and I don't think I'm being that rude by saying it. It's heavier than the 789, with significantly less cargo capacity, less passenger capacity (assuming 9Y), and only a bit more range. Its only advantage over the 789 is in ULH ops, or for an operator that has a large number of 359s and needs only a few smaller widebodies.

But the 35J seems to me like it should be much better. I'm sort of mystified by the low sales.

EPA001 · Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:48 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 24):
But the 35J seems to me like it should be much better. I'm sort of mystified by the low sales.

I believe they will come in time as soon as the specs are finally firmed up. With an EIS in 2017 and the first two production years sold out, there is plenty of time for the A350-1000.

PlymSpotter · Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:18 pm

Quoting n1786b (Thread starter):
Les Echos says the A350s will replace the A340s and 777-200s, and the first 787s will replace KLMs MD-11s.

Quoting n1786b (Thread starter):
10 already leased from ILFC for KLM Deliveries starting in 2016

If true, this will mean the last MD-11s are not retired until the 2017/2018 mark. However I was more under the impression that the A330-300s would begin MD-11 replacement?

Dan

scbriml · Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:18 pm

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 5):
This order was for Airbus to lose

I disagree.

There were plenty (including Boeing themselves) who expected the 787 to take the lion's share of this order.

No word from either OEM, so I guess this is still not firm yet.

cosmofly · Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:21 pm

It is becoming boring that airliners are always splitting the order.

So there is no more direct competitions and airliners always find the best model for each of their market segments???

This may actually help A and B to maximize their profits.

flymia · Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:39 pm

Quoting U2380 (Reply 10):
There was defiantly a lot of: 'AA are traitors and are putting American workers out of jobs' or words to that effect.

There was not much. It was more Boeing sucked at their job and blew it big time. It was embarassing to US Aviation that Boeing messed this up so much. I dont think too many people on Anet felt the way your saying. Boeing the company messed up.

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
I assume this happens in North America too

No it does not. Politics is the last thing airlines would care about. They have no input what so ever and people in North America dont really care if their plane is American made, Canadian or European as long as it get them there safely as most people around the world dont care. There was no bad press for AA buying airbus planes. Only good press for AA making a big order. The bad press was with Boeing doing a poor job.

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
So United, Delta, Southwest, Allegiant, Alaska are the only Airbus operators.

What?? What are you talking about?
Airbus Operators in the US:
US, DL, Frontier, Jet Blue, USA 3000, United, Hawaiian Airlines, UPS, Fed Ex, and soon AA. Besides for WN these are the largest airlines in the country. So what your saying about Airbus in the US and Canada is wrong. AC too of course in Canada.

lightsaber · Thu Sep 15, 2011 11:55 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 24):
Curious why... do you think it's poorly conceived (not enough benefit compared to the 77W or future 777 derivatives)

I think it is the horse by commitee. It doesn't serve any one airline particularly well. The 'break' in engine commonality isn't horrid (a la 77W), but the lack of better than 7200nm range limits the routes and the payload on TPAC routes. Perhaps I'm too TPAC focuses... But one thing that, in my opinion, sold the 77W was it acting as a combi out to 6500nm (full payload weight, IIRC to 5500nm. 6500nm is, IIRC, the 'volumed out' full payload) and having the option of leaving payload for missions all the way to DXB-LAX!

Please do not get me wrong. I'm very excited about the A359. Its payload/range is not only good, but will improve with age.

But for shorter missions, I believe there will be much more competiton from the A320NEO/737MAX. I believe many of the 767 and A333 (but not A332) routes will either go to narrowbodies or the equivalent growth will be taken by narrowbodies. So I am simply less excited about widebodies with less range post A320NEO/737MAX EIS. I believe a fundamental market shift is coming down the pipe for near-TATL or similar length missions.

I'm also biased against small (less than 17 aircraft per hub) sub-fleets. 17 aircraft is, in my opinion, the minimum economic number of aircraft (per hub) for rotating through equipment and maintaining the high utilization required to be competitive. Too few airlines will be able to justify 17+ A350-1000 sub-fleets.

Lightsaber

notaxonrotax · Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:11 am

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 5):
This order was for Airbus to lose, but the A358 is such a dog that there was no choice but to buy the 787 to replace the smaller aircraft at KLM.

Really, a dog??

You are a registered fan-boy, but you don't have to show it in every post.
KLM had their mind set on the 787 before your so-called "dog discovery".

No Tax On Rotax

qfa787380 · Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:21 am

Is it known when the non-leased 787s will EIS? I'm surprised they didn't get 359 slots before 2018, as I would have thought AF would have been able to negotiate earlier slots. I won't say this is indicative of 350 delays, but it may be.

Stitch · Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:29 am

Quoting notaxonrotax (Reply 31):
Really, a dog??

Perhaps not a "dog", but some A350-800 customers have cancelled (Bangkok Air this week), others have converted some or all of their A350-800 orders to A350-900s and those that remain behind the A350-800 (including launch customer QR) are not in a hurry to take delivery - no customer wanted the plane before 2016, which is why Airbus delayed the EIS to that date.

gigneil · Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:41 am

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
That's it.....

Are you being sarcastic? Most of the major North American operators fly Airbus types.

NS

Viscount724 · Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:47 am

Quoting gigneil (Reply 34):
Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
That's it.....

Are you being sarcastic? Most of the major North American operators fly Airbus types.

US Airways operates more Airbus aircraft than any other airline in the world.

EPA001 · Fri Sep 16, 2011 12:53 am

Quoting scbriml (Reply 27):
There were plenty (including Boeing themselves) who expected the 787 to take the lion's share of this order.

Especially since KLM already signed up for the later cancelled RBS lease deal on B787's. I guess after that Boeing had more to loose here then Airbus. I admit I also thought that Boeing would take the lions share on this one.

But this split is a very nice outcome and follows the trend other airlines have set. The B787 and the A350 can exist very well within one airlines fleet because they complement each other.

. I am quite sure we will see many more of these splits to come.

[Edited 2011-09-15 17:54:57]

col · Fri Sep 16, 2011 1:40 am

Well done to Airbus and Boeing, these frames will make up for the cancellations this year. Will be interesting to see what Airbus do with the 358, could be the 342 all over again.

RayChuang · Fri Sep 16, 2011 2:12 am

I don't think AF will order the A350-1000, mostly because of their substantial 777-300ER fleet. The A350-900's will primarily be used on AF's routes to South America, the former French colonies in central Africa, and some destinations in Asia.

fxramper · Fri Sep 16, 2011 2:17 am

This isn't a surprise and it makes me think they did this to lure VS into Skyteam.

dfambro · Fri Sep 16, 2011 2:39 am

Quoting SASMD82 (Reply 14):
How many long haul planes made by Boeing are flown by European airlines?? Many more than Airbus widebodies fly in North America.

A different way to look at this is EU vs NA sales questions is to see how many widebodies Airbus has sold to customers on each continent, which Airbus helpfully breaks out on their O&D spreadsheet.

300/310 family, 223 EU vs 239 NA
330 family, 246 EU vs 291 NA
340 family, 181 EU vs 39 NA
350 family, 68 EU vs 78 NA (not including this order)
380, 47 EU vs 0 NA

Not much evidence for nationalistic bias here. Note that ILFC, CIT, and GECAS are NA customers, accounting for a lot of the 330/340 orders, but almost none of the 300/310 orders.

ghifty · Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:11 am

Quoting breiz (Reply 3):

It will be interesting to see if the comments are as understanding as for the American Airlines order.

I'd imagine they'd be more "understanding" considering that KLM is consistently a Boeing customer..

flymia · Fri Sep 16, 2011 3:23 am

Quoting dfambro (Reply 40):
Not much evidence for nationalistic bias here. Note that ILFC, CIT, and GECAS are NA customers, accounting for a lot of the 330/340 orders, but almost none of the 300/310 orders.

Exactly, there is none.

PlanesNTrains · Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:44 am

Quoting U2380 (Reply 19):
with them two or three members reiterating their views more than once

It's always the two or three that get the rest of us labeled.

Quoting EddieDude (Reply 20):
Well, AM is a Mexican airline, not a U.S. ariline.

Yes, I meant to type North American.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 22):
My best friend ( ) Ikramerica may not have been at all polite, as is his prerogative, when he called the A350-800 " a dog".

Is it possible to be impolite to an inanimate object?

-Dave

astuteman · Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:50 am

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 30):
think it is the horse by commitee. It doesn't serve any one airline particularly well. The 'break' in engine commonality isn't horrid (a la 77W), but the lack of better than 7200nm range limits the routes and the payload on TPAC routes.

You must hate the 773ER if the A350-1000's range is your gripe.....

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 30):
Too few airlines will be able to justify 17+ A350-1000 sub-fleets.

???

How many justify 17+ 777 sub-fleets?

And if most of the commonality with the rest of the A350 pack remains, why is

abibus · Fri Sep 16, 2011 4:59 am

Airbus Loose Not boeing Airbus had a Lot of political help and was confidence that they would get at least 65% or more from this deal... so Airbus is Not the Winner here!!!

FlyingAY · Fri Sep 16, 2011 5:47 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 29):
No it does not. Politics is the last thing airlines would care about. They have no input what so ever and people in North America dont really care if their plane is American made, Canadian or European as long as it get them there safely as most people around the world dont care. There was no bad press for AA buying airbus planes. Only good press for AA making a big order. The bad press was with Boeing doing a poor job.

Do you really think that politics do not have any role in a business where billions of dollars are moving? I don't think the American politicians would be that incompetent...

Quoting dfambro (Reply 40):
A different way to look at this is EU vs NA sales questions is to see how many widebodies Airbus has sold to customers on each continent, which Airbus helpfully breaks out on their O&D spreadsheet.

300/310 family, 223 EU vs 239 NA
330 family, 246 EU vs 291 NA
340 family, 181 EU vs 39 NA
350 family, 68 EU vs 78 NA (not including this order)
380, 47 EU vs 0 NA

You should really make this chart without the lessors or take into account the airlines where the lessors deployed their planes... Could someone make the same chart regarding Boeing widebodies?

col · Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:15 am

Quoting abibus (Reply 45):
Airbus Loose Not boeing Airbus had a Lot of political help and was confidence that they would get at least 65% or more from this deal... so Airbus is Not the Winner here!!!

Wow, a manufacturer selling a chunk of its new products is a loser! Same can be said for those saying it was Boeings to lose, total BS. The winner is....wait for it................Airbus/Boeing. Yes, you both got large orders and options for your latest products. Well done to you both, now lets move on!

GBan · Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:26 am

Quoting flymia (Reply 29):
No it does not. Politics is the last thing airlines would care about. They have no input what so ever and people in North America dont really care if their plane is American made, Canadian or European as long as it get them there safely as most people around the world dont care. There was no bad press for AA buying airbus planes. Only good press for AA making a big order. The bad press was with Boeing doing a poor job.

You are right regarding airlines - they should and do care about making money and being safe. That doesn't mean that politicians wouldn't try to take influence:

http://www.seattlepi.com/business/ar...al-where-aircraft-were-1176497.php

Thread: New Odd Law For US Airlines: Act Of Patriotism? (by Udo Jun 22 2005 in Civil Aviation)

I think Mica is also the guy proposing anti missile systems for aircraft certified for more than 800 passengers around 2006 iirc. The proposal didn't succeed, apparently. (Edit - found a link: http://www.fas.org/asmp/campaigns/MANPADS/2005/YoungPR15jun05.htm)

Could we agree that pressure exists (no matter where) and usually fails to become a major element of buying decisions as long as we are not talking about state controlled airlines?

Congrats to Boeing and Airbus!

[Edited 2011-09-15 23:30:30]

Burkhard · Fri Sep 16, 2011 7:12 am

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 21):
You are right, AF has bought a large amout of Boeing planes.

The big influence of politics on airline purchases is an a.net myth nowadays. If the public pressure had any effect, it was the increase of options (which they will have got for free)

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 22):
My best friend ( ) Ikramerica may not have been at all polite, as is his prerogative, when he called the A350-800 " a dog". It is a concern that many are opting away from it.

From Paris, the only airport major that is out of A359 safe range, but within A358 range, is SCL - European carriers have not need for ULR.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 22):
Equally worrying is the A350-1000. No new sales yet, nothing from AF. Though whether they need to replace their 77Ws just yet could be a factor.

77W replacement may start when - in 2025-2030. No need to decide before 2018, after 779X and A35J first flight.

Quoting ebbuk (Reply 22):
Equally worrying is the A350-1000. No new sales yet, nothing from AF. Though whether they need to replace their 77Ws just yet could be a factor.

See above.

Quoting cosmofly (Reply 28):
It is becoming boring that airliners are always splitting the order.

So there is no more direct competitions and airliners always find the best model for each of their market segments???

This may actually help A and B to maximize their profits.

This may actually help the airlines to make profits.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 30):
The 'break' in engine commonality isn't horrid (a la 77W), but the lack of better than 7200nm range limits the routes and the payload on TPAC routes.

Please remind me, how many TPAC routes do AF and KL fly?

Quoting QFA787380 (Reply 32):
Is it known when the non-leased 787s will EIS? I'm surprised they didn't get 359 slots before 2018, as I would have thought AF would have been able to negotiate earlier slots.

Why should they want to? A343 and B772E can fly until than. With Libyan crisis more or less over, French companies in the contracts and Libya in need of money, the pressure to replace them is limited.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net