User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9579
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:35 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 48):
Quoting Aither (Reply 49):

I believe (although don't have time to look up right now) that the 787 is lighter than the A330neo, meaning it will still be performing better on shorter flights. The main advantage of the A330neo will be purchase and fleet integration costs, not fuel burn.
 
User avatar
777Jet
Posts: 6977
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:29 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 2:42 am

Quoting dare100em (Reply 46):
So for comparison purposses let's fix the aisles at 50 cm or about 19.7 inch. That gives:

- A330 at 8-abreast (11 armrests) --> 21 inch (53.5 cm) including armrest or nearly 18 inch (45.5 cm) without
- A330 at 9-abreast (12 armrests) --> 18.7 inch (47.5 cm) including armrest or 16 inch (40.8 cm) without
- 787 at 8-abreast (11 armrests) --> 22 inch (56.1 cm) including armrest or more than 19 inch (49.1 cm) without
- 787 at 9-abreast (12 armrests) --> 19.6 inch (49.9 cm) including armrest or 17 inch (43.1 cm) without
- A350 at 9-abreast (12 armrests) --> 20.2 inch (51.2 cm) including armrest or 17.5 inch (44.4 cm) without
- A350 at 10-abreast (13 armrests) --> 18.1 inch (46.1 cm) including armrest or 15.6 inch (39.5 cm) without
- 777W at 9-abreast (12 armrests) --> 21.2 inch (54 cm) including armrest or 18.6 inch (47.2 cm) without
- 777W at 10-abreast (13 armrests) --> 19.1 inch (48.6 cm) including armrest or 16.5 inch (42 cm) without

Thank you for the numbers.
DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90, 717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788/9, 306,320,321,332/3,346,359,388
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 3:08 am

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 48):

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 42):
am confused on why you think the A330neo works for charter markets and not the 787.

Few charter/leisure carriers need the 787's range.


Unless I am missing something, I thought the 787-8 had lower fuel burn than an A338 on all flights regardless of distance.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1812
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 4:13 am

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 52):
Unless I am missing something, I thought the 787-8 had lower fuel burn than an A338 on all flights regardless of distance.

It probably has, that hasn't stopped customers buying the A330 for other reasons. The 787 will be a bigger seller than the NEO, the NEO will appeal to some customers for other reasons.
 
Aither
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 5:16 am

Quoting Polot (Reply 50):
I believe (although don't have time to look up right now) that the 787 is lighter than the A330neo

Well it depends of the versions but between a 787-9 and an A330-300 the operating weight empty is similar but the A330-300 can carry more pax. I guess there must be a reason why Boeing decided to launch the 787-10.

[Edited 2015-12-16 21:21:24]
Never trust the obvious
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 6:55 am

Quoting Aither (Reply 54):
Well it depends of the versions but between a 787-9 and an A330-300 the operating weight empty is similar but the A330-300 can carry more pax.

The 789 is lighter and more capable than the A333 and the A339 and it carries more cargo while burning less fuel. The 330 is cheaper and possibly available sooner. The 789 is larger and should carry more seats in most LCC configurations. By most I mean pretty much all.

Quoting Aither (Reply 54):
I guess there must be a reason why Boeing decided to launch the 787-10.

To compete with the A350?

tortugamon
 
User avatar
neutrino
Posts: 1536
Joined: Thu May 10, 2012 5:33 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:02 am

Quoting Aither (Reply 54):
Well it depends of the versions but between a 787-9 and an A330-300 the operating weight empty is similar but the A330-300 can carry more pax. I guess there must be a reason why Boeing decided to launch the 787-10.

Huh? Can you elaborate on your opinion, with some numbers? Another member who had taken the trouble to explain and illustrate, and not just simply sprout a few words seem to disagree with you.

Quoting dare100em (Reply 43):
The A330-900 is only 0.9 m longer than the 787-9 (63.69 m vs. 62.8 m). Given the fact that the 787-9 is typically 9-abreast and the A330 8-abreast in economy the A330-900 should have less, not more capacity than the 787-9. The 787-9 comes with 36 LD3's where the A330-300 has 33. The A330-900 may manage 34 (?) but won't beat the 787-9 anyway.

In reality the 787-9 more often comes with a large business class while being the more "long range" plane. But if configured the same the 787-9 should have slightly more seats than the A330-900. They are really close.
Potestatem obscuri lateris nescitis
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 7:37 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 55):
The 789 is lighter and more capable than the A333 and the A339 and it carries more cargo while burning less fuel.

But at what price?

Boeing can't touch the 333 on price. Airbus will sell you an A333 for $120m and make money whilst doing so. For the price difference between the two, you can buy an additional 20 000t of fuel (at $500/t) for the A333. Then there is the lower ANS/ATS fees for the A333 which in the ME/Asia will save you $100k a year/airframe over the 789. Once you factor in the average sector length of the A333 which is 2000nm, you realise from a cost perspective that there isn't much between the two types. The scales only dip in the 787's favour on long haul routes where the 330 becomes payload restricted.

Also, the 789 is certainly not lighter than the A333. In our configs, the A333 averages 124.5t and our 789 128t empty. The 339neo is expected to gain 4-5t over the 333.
 
dare100em
Posts: 275
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 8:54 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 47):
At 3+4+3 on the A350, the seat cushion width should be 16.5” with 16.1” aisles. That being said, Airbus executive VP, strategy and marketing Dr. Kiran Rao has confirmed they are working on a way to make the seats closer to 17 inches in such a configuration (depending on who you speak to at Airbus, the seat cushion width at 3+3+3 is between 17.7 and 18 inches).

I thought 17" is the minimum aisle width possible/certificable?

Anyway you can only play with the given space. Yes, you can SOMEHOW make the seats close to 17" in a 10-abreast A350. The main step to get there beeing to make the armrests extrem small. If we go for 16.1" (41 cm) aisles and 16.9" (43 cm) seats that will leaf 1.5" (3.8 cm) armrests. However it is aranged, a 10-abreast A350 will be EXTREM narrow, much more than a 787 at 9-abreast and even a 777W at 10-abreast. Even worse than A330 at 9-abreast (wich is also clear because the cabin is only 33 cm or 13 inch wider --> 13 inch is not enough for a aditional seat.

The only plane wich has the same level to a 10-abreast A350 is a 8-abreast 767 (470 cm cabin width --> with 2x50 cm aisles that means 46.25 cm (18.2") per seat with armrests --> with 2" armrests 39.3 cm (15.3")).
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 8:58 am

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 57):
Also, the 789 is certainly not lighter than the A333. In our configs, the A333 averages 124.5t and our 789 128t empty. The 339neo is expected to gain 4-5t over the 333.

And with today's low fuel prices, the diff between A339 and 789 is almost negligible.

[Edited 2015-12-17 01:00:00]
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Spiderguy252
Posts: 1123
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 10:58 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 9:30 am

LCCs won't go for the A350 for the same reason why they never went for the 777 - too much metal.

The 787 and 350 coming out together has blurred the lines a little bit. The 787 is effectively an A300/A310/A330/B767 replacement, while the A350 is a B777/A340 parallel in the scheme of things.
Vahroone
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 9:32 am

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 57):
But at what price?

Boeing can't touch the 333 on price. Airbus will sell you an A333 for $120m and make money whilst doing so.

At 14/month post 2018 I think there will be some solid economies of scale favoring the 787. However, in the short term, absolutely, the A330 is cheaper and it should be as it is less capable, has less revenue opportunity, and higher costs to operate. Exactly, your point, a what price?

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 57):
The scales only dip in the 787's favour on long haul routes where the 330 becomes payload restricted.

Both in volume and in payload weight. The two really aren't similar in terms of range.

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 57):
Also, the 789 is certainly not lighter than the A333. In our configs, the A333 averages 124.5t and our 789 128t empty. The 339neo is expected to gain 4-5t over the 333.

I have the 789 at 124t. Still as you say the average A330 route is 2knm and the neo isn't supposed to be better on those missions and shorter than the ceo so the 787 should be better than the A330 on short and long haul missions. But they can always trade on price! Absolutely a fantastic machine but lets not pretend that its better than the 787.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 9:48 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
I have the 789 at 124t.

Where is this coming from? Do you have a source?

United Airlines 789s have been reported to be 127.5 tonne and now we have Chaostheory reporting a similar figure (128 tonne) for another airline.

I think your 124 tonne is just too optimistic.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
lets not pretend that its better than the 787.

Just like we should not pretend the 789 is lighter than it actually is  

Nobody claims the A330 is better than the 787, however airlines may find it more appropriate for their needs. With all those variables involved, every airline might have a different definition of 'better'.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 9:51 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
At 14/month post 2018 I think there will be some solid economies of scale favoring the 787. However, in the short term, absolutely, the A330 is cheaper and it should be as it is less capable, has less revenue opportunity, and higher costs to operate. Exactly, your point, a what price?

The A330 is cheaper simply because the production costs are ridiculously low. Boeing will never be able to pump out enough 787s to get their costs to a similarly low level.

Not sure why you keep emphasising the payload capabilities of the 789. As far as most operators are concerned, they're negligible over the A333. Both will carry 46-50t.

At 4600 flying hours/year, it will take 10 years before the 789s efficiency covers the additional procurement cost. That's assuming a $500/t fuel price. If you look at the jet a price today ~$430/t, the break level period is even longer.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
I have the 789 at 124t.

Then your numbers are crap and fabricated.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
787 should be better than the A330 on short and long haul missions.

Your argument is fuel burn centric which is why it fails. Fuel burn is a small part of operating costs. As I've tried to get across, factor in procurement costs, landing/overflight fees etc then the A330 comes out ahead in some instances.

Edited for crappy grammar.

[Edited 2015-12-17 02:03:02]
 
r2rho
Posts: 3096
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 10:13 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Thu Dec 17, 2015 1:54 pm

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 28):
Airbus has already announced some airlines which have the A350 on order will go for the 10 abreast option. There goes your philosophy.

That has nothing to do with it, there is no contradiction here. As others have pointed out, the A350 will be worse at 10-abreast than the A330 at 9-abreast - because it is designed as a true (I guess the word "pure" I used previously can be misunderstood) 9-abreast aircraft. That some airlines may choose to go 10-abreast is up to them and their customer base, and Airbus will not stop them in doing so. Similarly, other airlines will offer 8-abreast premium eco. Or business class. Or first. But the design point of the A350 is 9-abreast in Y.
 
Aither
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Fri Dec 18, 2015 4:22 am

Both 789 & A333 at 130t in similar configuration but some more seats on the A330 which makes a difference. At the end what really matters is how you operate the aircraft - on which routes. I like the A330/A350 combo but for some other airlines it may be different.

Quoting Spiderguy252 (Reply 60):
The 787 and 350 coming out together has blurred the lines a little bit. The 787 is effectively an A300/A310/A330/B767 replacement, while the A350 is a B777/A340 parallel in the scheme of things.

What "blurifies" things is that the 787 is like A330/767 replacement but has the long haul capabilities of 777/A340. Boeing may sell the 787 as "one fits all" but to me it's over designed for regional routes & too small for long haul routes !
Again I come back to my point : I don't see long haul LCCs operating routes > 6000nm (or it's EK "LCC model"). So below 6000nm, between a 787 and an A330, I guess the most impacting factors will not be related to the aircraft itself but more if you are already a Boeing or Airbus customer, the qualifications your pilots have etc.

[Edited 2015-12-17 20:23:29]
Never trust the obvious
 
User avatar
IslandRob
Posts: 623
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:04 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Fri Dec 18, 2015 4:37 am

Quoting Aither (Reply 65):
Boeing may sell the 787 as "one fits all" but to me it's over designed for regional routes & too small for long haul routes !

Sure, and that's why Boeing has sold over 1100 787s to over 60 different customers, including most blue chip airlines. Your opinion strikes me as both biased and laughable. Regards. -ir

[Edited 2015-12-17 21:02:50]
If you wrote me off, I'd understand it
'Cause I've been on some other planet
So come pick me up, I've landed
 
Aither
Posts: 1208
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Fri Dec 18, 2015 8:00 am

Quoting IslandRob (Reply 66):

Sure, and that's why Boeing has sold over 1100 787s to over 60 different customers, including most blue chip airlines. Your opinion strikes me as both biased and laughable. Regards. -ir

Don’t be aggressive. I did not say the 787 is a bad aircraft. I’m saying the pure product differences between 787s and A330s for many markets is narrow and therefore other factors outside the product itself are more impacting the decisions. It’s like if you were trying to sell cellphones to people who are only interested to make phone calls: does the iPhone despite being the most&brightest would be the best choice?
Also ordering 1000 twin aisles today is actually less impressive than ordering 300 twin aisles 20 years ago. Both 330s and 787s have been selling the past few years which confirms my point.
Never trust the obvious
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26430
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:59 pm

Quoting Aither (Reply 65):
Boeing may sell the 787 as "one fits all" but to me it's over designed for regional routes & too small for long haul routes!

The 787-8 is within a few percent of the A330-200 in terms of cabin floor area and the A330-200 has been a very successful long-haul platform.

The 787-9 is identical in cabin length to the 777-200ER and the 777-200ER was also a very successful long-haul platform. It is also effectively dead-even with the A330-300 and A340-300 in terms of cabin floor area, both of which have done alright, as well.  
 
User avatar
Polot
Posts: 9579
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 3:01 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:13 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 68):

And, as this thread shows, the 787 is of similar weight to the A330neo. If the weight is the same who cares if one has more range than necessary for the airline.

The A333 is a great aircraft, but Airbus is not going to build it forever- they already have its replacement on the horizon. The plane is doing good still, but Airbus is also highly motivated to sell it to bridge production until the NEO, and with NEO available Airbus is offering attractive pricing for the A333 that would be difficult for Boeing to profitably reach with the 787.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2465
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:29 pm

Quoting Polot (Reply 69):

The A333 is a great aircraft, but Airbus is not going to build it forever- they already have its replacement on the horizon. The plane is doing good still, but Airbus is also highly motivated to sell it to bridge production until the NEO, and with NEO available Airbus is offering attractive pricing for the A333 that would be difficult for Boeing to profitably reach with the 787.

With the splurge of orders this year for the NEO, I thought the production gap to the NEO has been bridged. It makes sense to me that Airbus has been focusing on CEO sales this year, and with the gap bridged now they're free to build up sales and a customer base with the NEO (Only 5 at the moment). Is this is true, then next year we should see the A330NEO pick up more orders.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6931
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Sat Dec 19, 2015 9:32 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
the A330 is cheaper and it should be as it is less capable, has less revenue opportunity, and higher costs to operate

I accept that the A330-800 has higher operating costs than the 787-8. But in what way does the A330-900 have higher operating costs that a 787-9?

I'm comfortable that the fuel burn delta between an A330-800 and 787-8 will be 4-5%, but I suspect you could just about get a cigarette paper between the A330-900 and 787-9.
The A338 pays for matching the 787-8's capability with higher fuel burn.
The A339 pays for matching the 787-9's fuel burn by being less capable.

Sales reflect this. Only 10 A338's sold to date.
But 150 A330-900's have been ordered in the space of 18 months.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
Absolutely a fantastic machine but lets not pretend that its better than the 787.

Indeed. Because it's clearly not.
But equally let's not insinuate that it is outclassed in the marketplace, in A330-900 guise at least.
150 sales in 18 months was neither "just luck" nor "give-away prices"   

Quoting frmrCapCadet (Reply 44):
What is of interest is that a-netters long and correctly believed that an updated 330 would continue to be competitive with the 787s in significant areas.

Indeed. Given hindsight, Airbus should have stuck with the old A350, and made the "new A350" a fair bit bigger (IMO).
I don't even think the A350-1000 sized product would have been that much later to market, given the 2 year delay imposed to improve it's capability

Rgds
 
PhoenixVIP
Posts: 374
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:41 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:41 am

Wow the stupidity arguments of A380 is dead has reached a completely different thread? Should have gone to the optometrist so the font can be read???

As I understand it, the existing twin-engine B777 isn't being used by LCC other than Scoot who are replacing with 789s, and carrying a lot more passengers than the A330 or 787, and the new model (being developed, ready by 2020 or so) will carry even more meaning its less worthwhile for LCCs?

It looks as if Airbus plan to go on depending on the four-engined A380 to carry the big loads.

Not sure that's wise - a long-range 650 seat A380, for a LCC? I think star gazing gives that sort of conclusion? Wise thing:Airbus provides the A330neo as a platform for LCC. But agreed, 787 is a far more versatile and seat-wise excellent platform for LCC and we see most of them using the 787. The A330 was there for the availabiility, but now we have the range and capacity of the 787-8 and -9 models meaning it can do more than the A330-900 for payload and range. It will come down to the LCC and its routes.

EDIT: The A350 I believe is too far and has too much in terms of payload, capacity, and range for LCC to make cost effective. I doubt Air Asia X will take delivery of that many not because of the number of A330-900s they have on order but because they are far more suitable for their needs in their already loss-make style.

[Edited 2015-12-19 03:43:45]
Inspire the truth.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Sun Jan 03, 2016 8:26 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 61):
I have the 789 at 124t.

Boeing just revealed the 787-9 OEW at 128,9 tonne.

http://www.boeing.com/assets/pdf/commercial/airports/acaps/787.pdf
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Sun Jan 03, 2016 11:29 pm

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 63):
The A330 is cheaper simply because the production costs are ridiculously low. Boeing will never be able to pump out enough 787s to get their costs to a similarly low level.

I can't be so sure. When production hits 14+ per month I would think production costs could be pretty darn competitive especially because I don't see the A330neo exceeding 7 per month. Sure the A330neo will certainly be cheaper to produce but I think they will spiral closer together over time.

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 63):
Not sure why you keep emphasising the payload capabilities of the 789. As far as most operators are concerned, they're negligible over the A333. Both will carry 46-50t.

It certainly tends on the operator but some will certainly be able to take advantage of the payload advantages (weight and volume) of the 789 over the A333. And if you don't need the payload capability the 78X will be better than the A333/9 as well. So the 789/78X are a pretty good pair for those looking to replace their A333s.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 71):
I accept that the A330-800 has higher operating costs than the 787-8. But in what way does the A330-900 have higher operating costs that a 787-9?

Well the weights appear to be about the same but the 787 has the aero advantage that should offset the higher financing costs and landing fees. I agree its much closer with the A339/789 comparison than the A338/788.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 71):
Indeed. Because it's clearly not.
But equally let's not insinuate that it is outclassed in the marketplace, in A330-900 guise at least.
150 sales in 18 months was neither "just luck" nor "give-away prices"   

Of course, and it clearly will be an excellent aircraft, I just don't think it will be long for this world when the 787 backlog and production costs shrink reducing two of the A330's advantages. It certainly serves a purpose.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 73):
Boeing just revealed the 787-9 OEW at 128,9 tonne.

Thanks Karel, I will have to update my records. This puts the weight of the 789 and A339 in very similar territory with the former offering much more capability (range and payload) at that same weight. Not the game-changing weight differences we thought CFRP would bring but material nonetheless.

tortugamon
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Mon Jan 04, 2016 1:17 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 74):
When production hits 14+ per month I would think production costs could be pretty darn competitive especially because I don't see the A330neo exceeding 7 per month. Sure the A330neo will certainly be cheaper to produce but I think they will spiral closer together over time.

You need to step back and remove the rose tinted spectacles if you honestly believe this.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 74):
It certainly tends on the operator but some will certainly be able to take advantage of the payload advantages (weight and volume) of the 789 over the A333. And if you don't need the payload capability the 78X will be better than the A333/9 as well. So the 789/78X are a pretty good pair for those looking to replace their A333s.

This is not how aircraft procurement is carried out. You make it out like it is a game of top trump cards where board members sit opposing each other like 7 year olds reading off and comparing aircraft specs. That is not how it is done.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 74):
And if you don't need the payload capability the 78X will be better than the A333/9 as well.

There you go again.

Funny that you haven't even touched on the one factor where the 787 really does have an unassailable advantage over the A330ceo/neo.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:02 pm

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 75):
You need to step back and remove the rose tinted spectacles if you honestly believe this.

I do believe it. At least in terms of the final assembly costs they should shrink with the 787 and rise with the A330 on a per unit basis as the 787 increases rate and the A330 decreases it. Certainly the procurement costs of a 787 will be higher than an A330 in total and I never expect that to change. Engine costs should be similar as they are nearly identical engines on the neo. 787 has lower maintenance costs as well.

tortugamon
 
StTim
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Mon Jan 04, 2016 7:15 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 76):
I do believe it. At least in terms of the final assembly costs they should shrink with the 787 and rise with the A330 on a per unit basis as the 787 increases rate and the A330 decreases it. Certainly the procurement costs of a 787 will be higher than an A330 in total and I never expect that to change. Engine costs should be similar as they are nearly identical engines on the neo. 787 has lower maintenance costs as well.

What I think you are missing here is that Boeing has already taken huge production cost savings into account. There are many, myself included, who have grave doubts they can hit these targets - so I see no near or even mid term cost swing going the way of the 787. So Boeing are not going to be able to move pricing aggressively Vs what Airbus can do.
 
User avatar
DocLightning
Posts: 21587
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 8:51 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:34 am

There are a few factors at work here.

First of all, the whole trend of LCCs doing long-haul routes started in the mid-2000s, which is when the (then) 7E7 program was launched. The A350 followed, so Boeing got the jump on that market.

Second, as has been pointed out, for a primarily Y-class layout, the 787's narrower body fits the same number of passengers abreast. It's possible to squeeze 10-abreast into an A350, but this seems a step so far that not even any LCCs have proposed it yet. I can see the seat being so narrow that customers might not even be able to get in them and this could result in costly lawsuits and claims for compensation.

Third, the 787 has some versatility in it that the A350 lacks. The 787's "bleedless engines," I'm given to understand, offer the largest benefit during takeoff and climb, so this makes the 787 attractive on shorter routes, while it is also efficient on longer routes.

It has been pointed out that the A350 is more capable, but honestly, the 787 can fly 15+ hours nonstop, which is longer than all but a handful of commercial flights. I can't imagine any LCC offering flights that long.
-Doc Lightning-

"The sky calls to us. If we do not destroy ourselves, we will one day venture to the stars."
-Carl Sagan
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 12:16 pm

Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 70):

Quoting Polot (Reply 69):

The A333 is a great aircraft, but Airbus is not going to build it forever- they already have its replacement on the horizon. The plane is doing good still, but Airbus is also highly motivated to sell it to bridge production until the NEO, and with NEO available Airbus is offering attractive pricing for the A333 that would be difficult for Boeing to profitably reach with the 787.

With the splurge of orders this year for the NEO, I thought the production gap to the NEO has been bridged. It makes sense to me that Airbus has been focusing on CEO sales this year, and with the gap bridged now they're free to build up sales and a customer base with the NEO (Only 5 at the moment). Is this is true, then next year we should see the A330NEO pick up more orders.

I do hope there is some opportunity for the A330neo. I think it will do better with low cost operators than the A350. The big question is will China order it for regional routes. The airplane is perfect for the Chinese carriers, but the timing of plane coincided with a fall off in the Chinese economy.

I personally wonder if the A330neo is the next MD11. It does have some good aspects. Low acquisition price will make it attractive for low cost airlines. Fuel burn is important and its value depends on oil prices. The order book has potential but despite what Astuteman thinks, the book is weak. I have serious doubts about Air Asia X. They aren't doing well financially. They keep trying and failing to find a market. They keep starting and stopping routes. I think the Delta order was a necessity. Airbus needed an order from a financially healthy airline that will take used airplanes in case they end up in the market. The delta order is reassuring for the financing companies since they know the value won't drop in five years like it can for niche airplanes. The TAP and Hawaiian orders are nice but are for small airlines. The real question is who the leasing companies are going to deliver the planes to. Those 150 orders are a bit tenuous. We will see what happens and if it sells well in East Asia.

I still think the 787 is better for LCCs. It has great fuel burn and enough range to be flexible. The A330neo won't match the capability and operating cost. The A350 is too large and expensive for any of the LCCs out there (including in my opinion Air Asia X). The biggest competition that the 787s is used 767s and A330s on the market.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2465
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 12:42 pm

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
The big question is will China order it for regional routes.

Not specifically, the A330neo is heavier and less economical on the shortest routes.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
The airplane is perfect for the Chinese carriers, but the timing of plane coincided with a fall off in the Chinese economy.

As a package it's a good fit.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
I personally wonder if the A330neo is the next MD11. It does have some good aspects. Low acquisition price will make it attractive for low cost airlines. Fuel burn is important and its value depends on oil prices. The order book has potential but despite what Astuteman thinks, the book is weak.

The book is weak, but it's worth noting that airlines have been ordering the A330ceo in large numbers, which suggests that the economics still pay off, but as above, Airbus could simply have been focusing efforts on bridging the gap before going all out on the Neo. We'll have to wait and see this year, If Airbus get 60-80 orders this year and maybe 4-5 new customers then I'd say the A330neo is in good shape so far.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
I have serious doubts about Air Asia X. They aren't doing well financially. They keep trying and failing to find a market. They keep starting and stopping routes. I think the Delta order was a necessity.

I think they'll take most of the orders, but don't disagree on their overall position.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
Airbus needed an order from a financially healthy airline that will take used airplanes in case they end up in the market.

There's still time. The A330neo may not be popular, but I don't think Airbus would struggle to place them like they would the A380.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
I still think the 787 is better for LCCs. It has great fuel burn and enough range to be flexible. The A330neo won't match the capability and operating cost.

The fuel burn part is the most appealing, but I don't think range is that important. There are very few LCCs flying routes that an A330 can't do but a 787 can, maybe more if it's the A333 vs the 788/789. It's already a known fact that the A330neo won't match the capability or operating cost, but LCCs aren't averse to looking for good deals on aircraft acquisition over operating costs.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
The A350 is too large and expensive for any of the LCCs out there (including in my opinion Air Asia X). The biggest competition that the 787s is used 767s and A330s on the market.

The A359 is marginally larger than the 789. I don't think it makes that much difference. We've discussed this with EI, if you don't make money with an A350, you're very unlikely to make money with a 789. The 788 is a fair bit smaller.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21738
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 1:44 pm

Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 57):

Boeing can't touch the 333 on price. Airbus will sell you an A333 for $120m and make money whilst doing so. For the price difference between the two, you can buy an additional 20 000t of fuel (at $500/t) for the A333. Then there is the lower ANS/ATS fees for the A333 which in the ME/Asia will save you $100k a year/airframe over the 789. Once you factor in the average sector length of the A333 which is 2000nm, you realise from a cost perspective that there isn't much between the two types. The scales only dip in the 787's favour on long haul routes where the 330 becomes payload restricted.

Also, the 789 is certainly not lighter than the A333. In our configs, the A333 averages 124.5t and our 789 128t empty. The 339neo is expected to gain 4-5t over the 333.
Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
I do hope there is some opportunity for the A330neo. I think it will do better with low cost operators than the A350. The big question is will China order it for regional routes. The airplane is perfect for the Chinese carriers, but the timing of plane coincided with a fall off in the Chinese economy.

It seems you can make the point that the A339 is quite unneeded to replace the A333 because it's heavier, costlier, and most routes are around 2000nm so any fuel burn improvement in cruise isn't all that meaningful.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 1:57 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 81):
It seems you can make the point that the A339 is quite unneeded to replace the A333

If the A339 is unneeded, what else would you buy for 1:1 A333 replacement? Airbus plans to end A333 production before the end of the decade, that leaves only 789 and A339 as replacement option. Both aircraft are on pair regarding economics, but the latter one comes with a lower acquisition price.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 2:44 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 82):
If the A339 is unneeded, what else would you buy for 1:1 A333 replacement? Airbus plans to end A333 production before the end of the decade, that leaves only 789 and A339 as replacement option. Both aircraft are on pair regarding economics, but the latter one comes with a lower acquisition price.

The 787-9 is a perfect one for one replacement for the A330-300. Capacity is equivalent. Fuel burn is better. Maintenance is lower. Range is better. The only drawback is that it is expensive. Some argue that the A339 is equivalent but I don't think that a good comparison has been made yet. I personally do not think they will be on par. Most of the sources saying that they are on par are from places like leeham which is a little biased. Leeham and Ferpe seem to think the 777-200ER and A343-300 are roughly equivalent as well and that we should ignore that one far out delivered the other. I don't really trust their judgment on A339 vs 787-9.

[Edited 2016-01-05 06:48:39]
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 4:07 pm

Quoting StTim (Reply 77):
So Boeing are not going to be able to move pricing aggressively Vs what Airbus can do.

I agree that the 787 will be more expensive but I am just saying that the production costs, namely the FAL costs, will narrow as production rates increase for the 787 and decrease for the A330. The 787 is still on a rather steep learning curve. We have not seen the end of the cost reductions / productivity increases - They have a long way to go and we will have to see if they get there.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
The order book has potential but despite what Astuteman thinks, the book is weak. I have serious doubts about Air Asia X.

I do as well. This really should be the glory time for the A330neo orders as it certainly has an availability advantage. If its economics are as good as the 789 and it is cheaper then it should be selling extremely well right now as the 789 availability will only improve. Yet I have not been impressed with their ability to sell the neo directly to Blue Chip or fast growing airlines.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 81):
It seems you can make the point that the A339 is quite unneeded to replace the A333 because it's heavier, costlier, and most routes are around 2000nm so any fuel burn improvement in cruise isn't all that meaningful

Which I thin is an excellent point. Most A330 routes are under 2000nm yet the A339 is no better on these routes. At least the 789 offers more flexibility to handle larger routes as well and offers more revenue potential should an operator need it.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 82):
If the A339 is unneeded, what else would you buy for 1:1 A333 replacement? Airbus plans to end A333 production before the end of the decade, that leaves only 789 and A339 as replacement option.

I think the 78X is an excellent A333 replacement for those who have not had any trouble filling their A333s or could use the additional range. I thin SQ sees the 78X serving this role. BR and EY possibly as well. Its more like a 1.15:1 replacement but I suspect some airlines will want that growth. This could help sell the 789 as well as the commonality and flexibility could be an advantage.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2465
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 5:07 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 84):
I do as well. This really should be the glory time for the A330neo orders as it certainly has an availability advantage. If its economics are as good as the 789 and it is cheaper then it should be selling extremely well right now as the 789 availability will only improve. Yet I have not been impressed with their ability to sell the neo directly to Blue Chip or fast growing airlines.

I think we have to wait until the end of this year to really see how the A330neo will stack up. If we're in a similar position then I would start worrying, but there is time, and with the production gap bridged Airbus doesn't need to push the CEO so heavily anymore.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21738
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:17 pm

Just to be clear, A330 family a/c are wonderful and there's plenty of good reasons to keep buying them, especially if you're already a A330 operator. I'm just trying to understand the implications of some of the earlier posts.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 82):
If the A339 is unneeded, what else would you buy for 1:1 A333 replacement?

An A333, either one of the 'gap fillers', or a used one?

It will be interesting to see what Delta does going forward, given RA's enthusiasm about used frames. Maybe they'll let someone else run their A330ceos around for 10-12 years and pick them up as they come off lease and run them for another 10-12 years. However their TATL 'core routes' seem to average around 3500 nm ( ref: http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?P=ATL-LHR...S%2CJFK-LHR%2CJFK-AMS&MS=wls&DU=nm ) which is a different situation than the 2000 nm quoted above. I think you can see that 2000nm works out better for EU or Asian carriers ( http://www.gcmap.com/mapui?R=2000nm%...G&R=2000nm%40ATL%0D%0A9380nm%40LHR ).

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 82):
Airbus plans to end A333 production before the end of the decade

Right, which is just a business decision, one that may or may not be changed based on market demand. I presume the decision won't change, but you never know.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
trex8
Posts: 5343
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:40 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 78):
It's possible to squeeze 10-abreast into an A350, but this seems a step so far that not even any LCCs have proposed it yet. I can see the seat being so narrow that customers might not even be able to get in them and this could result in costly lawsuits and claims for compensation.

Wasnt Air Asia X going to use 10 across on the A350??

CX used 10 across on their Tristars.They survived the 70s and 80s fine.
 
trex8
Posts: 5343
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 6:43 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 84):
I thin SQ sees the 78X serving this role

A big chunk of SQs A359 order is for the regional variant.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6931
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:16 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 74):
but the 787 has the aero advantage

It has?
The A330-900 has a 4m span advantage and higher aspect ratio wing (now that it has the tip extensions)
I think your assertion is far from a given.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 76):
787 has lower maintenance costs as well.

It has?
Do you have any evidence to support that?
Whilst the 787 has been evolving, so too has the A330. Maintenance intervals are remarkably similar, despite the 787 hype
I think your assertion is far from a given.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
I still think the 787 is better for LCCs. It has great fuel burn and enough range to be flexible. The A330neo won't match the capability and operating cost.

Capability? Agree.
Operating cost? I see no reason why the A330-900 will cost more to operate than a 787-9.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
The order book has potential but despite what Astuteman thinks, the book is weak.

The A330-900 has sold 150 examples in a fraction of the time it's taken the 787-10 to sell 164 copies.
I'd be interested to see what you think a strong order book looks like after 18 months on offer

Quoting Revelation (Reply 81):
It seems you can make the point that the A339 is quite unneeded to replace the A333 because it's heavier, costlier, and most routes are around 2000nm so any fuel burn improvement in cruise isn't all that meaningful

There seems to be an almost embarrassing enthusiasm to play the A330-900 down on this thread.
A bit curious, IMO

Rgds
 
StTim
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:31 pm

There seems to be an under current that the 787-9 is better in each and every department (apart from purchase price) so one wonders a) why Airbus believes there is a market and b) Airlines are buying the 330NEO (although not many yet but it is early days).

For me I think Airbus will sell several hundred NEO's (my personal guess is around 500) and each of these will be a 787-9 that is not sold. In addition, because of the competition, every competition won by the 787-9 will be at a lower price than without the NEO. This will not kill Boeing but neither will it help it climb out of the current financial hole that the 787 programme finds itseld in at the moment.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:48 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 89):
It has?
The A330-900 has a 4m span advantage and higher aspect ratio wing (now that it has the tip extensions)

If a cutting edge CFRP fuse and wing doesn't beat a wing treatment then the A350 is in as much trouble as the 787. I personally don't believe that.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 89):
Whilst the 787 has been evolving, so too has the A330. Maintenance intervals are remarkably similar, despite the 787 hype

Dated info but some is here:

Quote:
"Boeing 787 deputy chief mechanic Justin Hale says that, over the first eight-year period, the reduced maintenance burden will free the aircraft for around 131 more flights than the average Airbus A330 over the same period: "It would have 14 fewer line checks, two fewer base [C] checks, and one less structural [4C] check."

Boeing says the advanced structure, which will be around 52% by weight composites, will not require its first heavy maintenance D check until its twelfth year in service, compared with eight years for the 777, and six for the 767 and A330. First base maintenance check will occur at 36 months, or twice the interval for the 767/A330. The same interval for the 777 is 24 months. Line maintenance check intervals are similarly extended with the 787 at a planned 1,000h versus 600h for the 777, 700h for the A330 and 300h for the 767."
http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...intenance-details-revealed-194184/

The maintenance intervals should be longer and the maintenance systems is said to be more powerful and flexible meaning checks should be quicker. Similar engines on the neo/787 should reduce this advantage but I do believe it is still real. As you are well aware CFRP doesn't require the same corrosion inspection over the aircraft's lifetime.

Quoting StTim (Reply 90):
For me I think Airbus will sell several hundred NEO's (my personal guess is around 500) and each of these will be a 787-9 that is not sold. In addition, because of the competition, every competition won by the 787-9 will be at a lower price than without the NEO.

TAP, HA, and AirAsia orders at least partially came at the expense of the A350 not the 787. They won't be the last. Also, these customers could have ordered more 242t A330ceos as well.

I do think the A330neo was a good idea at the time, thought I am questioning it lately due to the lack of orders, primarily because it took pressure off the A350 line and gave Airbus more revenue and profit potential at only a modest expense. I do think it will be a good idea in the long run but its no 787 and that isn't all bad.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 6542
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 7:51 pm

Quoting StTim (Reply 90):
the 787-9 is better in each and every department (apart from purchase price)

It is. It's lighter, has better payload range, is cheaper to maintain, and has more capacity. But the difference is not great in any of those areas, and Airbus has massively more latitude when it comes to lowering the purchase price.

Quoting StTim (Reply 90):
a) why Airbus believes there is a market and b) Airlines are buying the 330NEO

Because Airbus knows it can market the aircraft at a price that's painful for Boeing, and because at that price the A330neo is a great buy.

Quoting StTim (Reply 90):
For me I think Airbus will sell several hundred NEO's (my personal guess is around 500)

That seems a reasonable guess; I'd guess closer to 350, but I've never really been a A330neo bull.

Quoting StTim (Reply 90):
each of these will be a 787-9 that is not sold.

This part is wrong, though. The A330neo is not just competing with the 788/789 -- it's competing with the A330ceo and the A350-900 as well. Some of the A330neo sales may well have gone to other Airbus products in its absence. That's part of why I was an A330neo pessimist; I felt the A330ceo could do the same job of exerting price pressure on the smaller 787 variants. But apparently the A330neo is cheap enough to develop that shrinking the performance delta to the 787 will sell more frames, Airbus expects at the 787's expense.

[Edited 2016-01-05 11:52:27]
 
trex8
Posts: 5343
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:02 pm

I have no clue what the A330neo mx checks are or the definition of a D check in the 2005 article you link to but "heavy" mx checks in 2009 for a A330ceo are every 12 years
http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pr...efit-from-lower-maintenance-costs/
 
StTim
Posts: 3469
Joined: Thu Aug 08, 2013 7:39 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:27 pm

Quoting seabosdca (Reply 92):
This part is wrong, though.

I accept that the 330NEO will also scavange orders from the 350. That was an oversight. I suspect Airbus are comfortable with that as it means, at present, they will deliver the 330NEO and also fill the 350 slot for the same period.

This is a near term comfort and may limit the overall life cycle of the 330NEO.
 
billreid
Posts: 761
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:04 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 8:50 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 3):
The 787 smaller, more cramped and uncomfortable when compared to the A350, this is the LCC wheelhouse so yes they would probably prefer it.

Yes. Absolutely correct.
Reality is the A350 is losing more sales to the A330 than the B787.
But it takes a very smart sales department to improve an old product to hurt flagship salesthat cost gazillions in development costs.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 29):
Now that the A330neo exists and the fact that Air Asia X is a mess financially I am not entirely bullish on them operating a large fleet of A350s.

Right on!

Quoting CRJ900 (Reply 24):
The A359 will be a great aircraft for Thomas Cock Airlines when their A333s are worn out. 400-425 pax and nonstop range for Thailand - Scandinavia - Caribbean.

The B-789 is a smarter size for thier business model regardless of the bells and whistles.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 34):
* regarding Lion - they cancelled their 787 order and opted for the A333 instead. So this indicates the A333 is indeed better for LCC operations than the 787...

Proves my point. The A333 is stealing sales from both the A350 andB787. It makes me laugh.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 47):
At 3+4+3 on the A350

I hate this config.It scares me.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 47):
16.5 inch seat cushion widths with 16.5 inch aisles per the Airbus ACAP.

Too big.Why not 12"pitch with 8" seat width? I mean what is going on,isn't torture illegal under the UN?
Some people don't get it. Business is about making MONEY!
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:05 pm

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 79):
The order book has potential but despite what Astuteman thinks, the book is weak.
Quoting tortugamon (Reply 84):

I do as well. This really should be the glory time for the A330neo orders as it certainly has an availability advantage. If its economics are as good as the 789 and it is cheaper then it should be selling extremely well right now as the 789 availability will only improve.

The naysayers said the same when Airbus launched the A320neo. Look where it is now. This is another thread where I fear users will be eating their words. Time to hit the bookmark star!
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:06 pm

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 78):
The 787's "bleedless engines," I'm given to understand, offer the largest benefit during takeoff and climb, so this makes the 787 attractive on shorter routes, while it is also efficient on longer routes.

Packs on/Packs off take offs have a negligible impact on fuel burn. I'd hazard a guess and say it is less than 50kg for a 767/330.
 
Chaostheory
Posts: 1134
Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:08 pm

Again there's too much concentration on the minutiae.

For those who keep harping on about fuel burn and weight, here are numbers from a weight removal study an airline did across all fleet types:

On a 6hr sector, an A330 suffers a 775kg fuel burn penalty for every additional 2.30t of weight it carries. Assuming the neo weight increase falls at 4.6t over the ceo, that's an additional 1550kg fuel burn. This doesn't take into account the aero or engine sfc improvements on the neo. It becomes apparent than any efficiency advantage the ceo holds over the neo on shorter routes is a matter of sub 1t.

(Forums playing up hence separate postings)
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 21738
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: LCCs Prefer The 787 Over The A350

Tue Jan 05, 2016 9:11 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 89):
There seems to be an almost embarrassing enthusiasm to play the A330-900 down on this thread.

Sorry you are being put off by this thread. Here and elsewhere I've been supportive of the A330 family, ceo and neo alike. In the case of my post you've quoted, I was responding to a post saying that A330s on average fly 2000 nm routes and that factors such as landing fees based on weight favor the A330ceos. I would hope we could find a way to discuss this without upsetting people.

[Edited 2016-01-05 13:33:44]
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own

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