|Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 148):|
Of course, the 787 was a bit of a different story as Boeing needed an A330 competitor / 767 replacement.
Agreed and a warmed over 767 with new engines wasn't going to be enough of an improvement to get them there.
|Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 150):|
Maintaining a rate of 6 per month should not be impossible.
Agreed, I think it is likely. I think in the near future it will be because of A330ceo development that will get them to that rate, but post 2020/2022 I think the A330neo by itself will have a harder time hitting that rate. Either way I don't think 500 units is unrealistic and even half that number could still makes financial sense for Airbus.
|Quoting RayChuang (Reply 151):|
In the end, the long-range LCC's prefer the 787-8 and 787-9 because they have the range (over 7,000 nm) to fly very long routes on inclusive tour flights.
Well lets look at some LCC operators of the 787 and look at their longest routes:
The A333 operates routes up to ~5,100nm and the A339 will only improve range. Scoot and Jetstar operate a lot of short routes where the A339 may not be any better than the A333 let alone the 787. DY
operates significantly longer routes where the A339 could come in handy but maybe with their cargo demands the 787 works better. Obviously these are just examples because these airlines didn't have the option of the A339 when they were ordering their 787s. New operators could chose differently. Either way I am not sure Scoot or Jetstar chose the 787 just because its range.