I just noticed when i looked at Randy's blog how poorly the 787 is selling in Europe -- not one major carrier has bought (no offense to LOT, Monarch or First Choice). In America, I can understand as it appeals to the legacy carriers which are hurting. But are European airlines hurting badly too? Are they just conservative waiting to see the plane fly? Are European airlines just so pro-Airbus that they'll wait for a European solution? Or is it just a weird coincidence and we can expect to see a lot of orders soon. 500 orders and almost none for Europe. That is surprising.

Well, rumors are flying that a recent UFO order might be for VS or even EI. I'd consider them European "majors".  

(I hope it is because they want to support Airbus)

Also bear in mind that many of the European majors are yet to make their decision between the 787 & the A350XWB.

Are there any import duties and VAT taxes to be paid when "importing" planes from US?

In my opinion, BA will definitely buy the 787. They simply want to see what the A350 has to offer first and make the competition between Airbus and Boeing work in their favour (for prices).

As for AF and LH, they already have a nice fleet of A330s which simply doesn't need replacing just yet.

Yes, I don't think Boeing is particularly worried about the 787's sales in Europe. Virgin is said to be near a 787 order and I'm pretty sure my home team will be signing up soon  .

As AlanUK points out, there are quite a few airlines which simply don't need new aircraft at this time; in due course, I can see KLM and AF needing 787s and I'll eat my hat if BA doesn't order it (actually that's the same hat I threatened to eat if QF didn't order the 777, but that's another story!).

Then there's Iberia, Austrian, Lufthansa, Malev, Czech, Tarom and Alitalia (assuming they survive), some of which will order 787s. So, give it a chance; the 787 has many, many years ahead of it!

I think most European airlines are in no hurry because they have a rather new fleet. If you are not in a hurry it is much better to wait and see how the 787 and 350 perform. The above statement that they want to support airbus is nonsense. A private airline, like LH for example, does not support manufacturers, they only buy aircrafts which are best for their economics and passengers.

I agree, most of the major European airlines really don't need additional new airplanes right now. I think BA is the only exception.

Firstly, we have no idea how the 787 is selling in Europe - just because orders are not announced or finalized does not mean that Boeing has not sold 787s in Europe. Many claim that there are more 787 orders than we know about....Boeing only announces orders when they are finalized AND when the airline agrees to the order being announced. Also, there are a good number of 787 orders still unidentified......and on another a.net thread, one of our Boeing orders experts determined that some of those orders come from four seperate airlines that have yet to announce orders for the 787....and some could be EU based. There is much more going on than meets the eye.

Other considerations: as correctly pointed out above, many of the European airlines have newer widebody fleets than their US counterparts, thus, the ""need"" for the 787 is not so severe. Many European carriers operate rather new A330/A340 and 777 fleets and are still taking delivery of additional new longrange aircraft.....aside from the NW A330s and a couple of 777s for AA and for CO, hardly any new widebodies have been delivered to US carriers in recent years. Thus, the US carriers are in need of newer aircraft more quickly and have more pressure to order. Also, the US carriers with their multihub high-frequency route systems seem more oriented to the smaller members of the 787 family (788/789) while the Europeans with one and at most two hub networks and slot controlled and overcrowded airports will probably have more interest in the larger members of the 787 family (789/7810).....and the 787-10 has not even been launched yet. Thus, they have a bit more time to make their decisions.

And, the A350 is a big factor.....many European carriers do want to wait and see exactly what Airbus is coming up with. Many may wait until the final specs on the variants of the A350 can be analyzed....this is not a political thing, this is a practical business decision. Many of the European carriers have already purchased a large number of Airbus airplanes and they are waiting to see if they can get a better deal from Airbus.

Give it time.

indeed A330´s have been sold to the bigger european airlines like LH, AF, KLM, SAS, Swiss, Austrian, TAP, Sabena..

Bigger airline that not bought A330´s: BA, IB, AZ who knows..

The 787s 20% improvement over existing types probably didn´t mean A330.

787-8 seems a bit small & the 787-9 will EIS 2010 and be available for new customers.. 2013?

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 6): I'll eat my hat if BA doesn't order it (actually that's the same hat I threatened to eat if QF didn't order the 777, but that's another story!).

Wich means that either you cannot keep your promise now because the hat has already been eaten OR you didn't keep your promise thenand it's still uneaten!!   

But seriously, no worries for Boeing I think:

BA: I'm sure they'll order fairly soon, need 767 replacement
AF: Will order in the future, not too soon though
KL: see AF, KL is always conservative in ordering new types
LH: I reckon they'll end up operating both 787 and 350 in the end
IB: No idea
LX: Whenever they'll order next, I think the 787 is better for their needs than the 350 (size)
Alitalia: Is a 767 operator, so in the unlikely event that they can ever afford a new plane is a potential customer


IM

I would add to that, CSA and maybe Tarom.

CSA is one of the few airlines still flying the Airbus A310, doesn't CSA need to look for an A310 replacement? Those date from 1992. If they don't order the 787 because all the delivery slots are filled until at least 2011, they can still order 767-300ER's or 400ER's should they need those aircraft early. Boeing still makes them doesn't it? I know it is very unlikely that another airline, besides DL and CO, ever orders the 400ER but it is not an impossibility. The 300ER definitely has sufficient range to fly from PRG to JFK with a full load of pax and cargo, that one would make sense. Unless they choose the A350XWB.

Tarom also has A310's but they don't fly them anymore unless CSA does. Tarom's two A310's are parked, they had three minus one that crashed in Romania just after take off in 1995. So I don't think Tarom needs new long haul aircraft, at least not now. I don't even know if Tarom's A310's still have valid airworthiness certificates.

I agree that BA is a likely candidate.

Ben Soriano
Brussels Belgium

Quoting IMatAMS (Reply 11): BA: I'm sure they'll order fairly soon, need 767 replacement

I've said so many times before that Im not sure this will happen anymore, despite my usename 

They only operate a minor fleet of 767 a/c, and a lot of the routes the 767 operates actually warrant a 777 (MAN-JFK), it's just they don't have the aircraft available. This tells me they will need something considerably bigger than the 787, so unless its for the -10 or maybe the -9 at a push, I don't see a huge order for 787 a/c.

Time will tell if I'm right, and I'll be the first to admit it if I'm wrong, but theres my $0.02

Quoting Keesje (Reply 10): The 787s 20% improvement over existing types probably didn´t mean A330.

Yes, it does improve mean improved over the A-330. And 767.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 14): The 787s 20% improvement over existing types probably didn´t mean A330. Yes, it does improve mean improved over the A-330. And 767.

The 20% figure is over the 767, not the A330. IIRC the improvement over the A330 is in the single digits.

I think the reason why not so many European carries have not ordered the 787 is two-fold: Geography and necessity.
Europe is fairly central to most points on Earth, especially in the northern hamisphere. European carriers don't need the range of a 787 like the PacRim carriers do to get across the Pacific. Additionally, a lot of the main European carriers operate relatively new fleets of 777s and A330s. It's too early for them to replace relatively new aircraft with 787's. When they do replace them, the A350 will likely be available, which will allow them to get a better price on replacement aircraft, regardless of whether they chose the 787 or the A350. In short, most European carriers don't need the range, and they don't need it now.

remember TUI probably are undisclosed

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 15): The 20% figure is over the 767, not the A330. IIRC the improvement over the A330 is in the single digits.

If you can. I'd appreciate a source. I was always under the impression the A330 was VERY close to the CASM of the 767, but offered better range/payload and carried much more cargo, making it a better aircraft in many situations.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 15): The 20% figure is over the 767, not the A330. IIRC the improvement over the A330 is in the single digits.

Disagree. You don't need to do math to figure out the improvement. If the improvement was only single digits, it's doubtful that Boeing would have sold over 500 787s before EIS. Do we have to rehash the specs again?

Bleedless, more efficient engines.
Carbon composite fuselage
Advanced & more efficient avionics
Lower maintenance costs
etc. etc.
(A330 is heavier than the B787, per closest equivalent model)

Even the A330 with 787 engines slapped on won't be as economical as the 787. So where does that leave the standard A330?

SparkingWave ~~~

To me the question is not why is the B787 "not selling" in Europe but how long European carriers can afford to wait and make a decision?

For an interesting, thorough and dispassionate discussion, you may want to read the current business book "Boeing vs. Airbus" by John Newhouse. Including interviews with many principal leaders, managers and engineers, Newhouse includes both praise and criticism of both companies, and a very readable history of how events have led to where we are today, given decisions or non-decisions made by all involved since the 1970s.

Beyond AFR, BAW and DLH, the other European carriers except VIR are waiting and working on the various potential ownership decisions that are floating around, in light of the newly negotiated agreements involving the EEU and USA. AFR and DLH are the survivors in this dance, which has already consumed KLM and SWR.

There is certainly political pressure for AFR, DLH and their associates to wait for the Airbus team to "prove" the A350 as a valid option before any decisions on the mid-size replacement for the A-330. At the same time, Asian carriers are not under the same constraints, and there is great interest in Asia for long-range, thin-load lift to North America.

It appears that, in the end, there will be a "safe" mix of B787-A350 orders from Europe, with BAW leading the way. DLH will not wait as long as AFR. It will also not be a surprise, given the eventual production schedules, to see the B747-800 sold in Europe. There are roadblocks for European B787 orders that have nothing to do with Airbus. Where will the production line slots at Boeing come from since the near-term slots are sold out? Can or will Boeing increase production?

The immediate challenges for the "Hamlet" European carriers are:

Can be A350 be delivered by Airbus in a competitive time window and as a viable alternative in terms of design and efficiency (i. e., composite construction weight advantages, etc.)?

Can the A350 be produced by Airbus alongside the A380?

Can the "duel-CEO" system, et. al. again outflank a resurgent Boeing?

Can Germany convince France that Airbus needs to be run as a modern business with one team?

We will see.

[Edited 2007-04-09 16:14:44]

[Edited 2007-04-09 16:18:23]

Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 17): If you can. I'd appreciate a source. I was always under the impression the A330 was VERY close to the CASM of the 767, but offered better range/payload and carried much more cargo, making it a better aircraft in many situations.

Correct and you can use the same reasoning for the A330 vs. 787. You should do a search here on a.net. This has been discussed to exhaustion. Nevertheless, I don't have any specific source, ence the "IIRC". Everyone seems to be comparing only the 787 with the A350 these days and each manufacturer has their own biased numbers, but my limited understanding is that additional revenue from both greater cargo capacity and more passengers on the A330-2/3 offsets some of the fixed savings that the 787-8/9 brings to the table. Also, the maintenance savings that Boeing is advertising for the 787 won't exist until the FAA approves the reduced maintenance schedule that Boeing is selling. And that's without factoring in a new trend in offshoring heavy maintenace to places like Asia and Central America where costs are much cheaper.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 20): but my limited understanding is that additional revenue from both greater cargo capacity and more passengers on the A330-2/3 offsets some of the fixed savings that the 787-8/9 brings to the table.

You might want to check your numbers. The 787 has greater capacity than equivalent A330 models (assuming 9 abreast economy). Hence why I refereed to CASM. The 20% number refers to CASM.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 10): Bigger airline that not bought A330´s: BA, IB, AZ who knows..

I thought Iberia were to recieve one or two a330's from somewhere?

Remember that the bulk of the 767's sales were in the US, Canada, and Japan. I will say that the same will be true for the 787. Delta and American have not yet ordered the 787, but they are soon likely to place orders. US Airways is taking a second look at the 787 vs. the A350XWB, as their previous A350 order was for the original A350 concept.

Has anyone considered the fact that the Europeans are much more conservative with their orders? Just like automobiles, a European won't order something on a whim, without first considering its impact on budgeting. American CEO's, however, seem to be able to justify sacrificing their airlines well being in order to have the "newest fleet." Northwest seems to be the only airline that realizes that the DC-9, although well over 30 years old, is their cash cow. Maybe this is the reason they have avoided chapter 11 this whole time. This always begs the question....why didn't any of the majors realize the potential of the 717? What a perfect aircraft. This is quite possibly the most underated aircraft of the 21st century.

Quoting Manfredj (Reply 24): Northwest seems to be the only airline that realizes that the DC-9, although well over 30 years old, is their cash cow. Maybe this is the reason they have avoided chapter 11 this whole time

Did you just fall from the Moon?
Northwest avoided chapter 11? Not Really

The 20% efficiency figure is indeed relative to the 767-300ER. Yet remember, the 767 is nowhere near the dog some would have you believe, which is why it still held a 2:3 sales margin against the A332. I have not seen the figures versus an A330-200, but I would expect them to be at least in the 10% range, otherwise Airbus would never have bothered with the original A350 nor would some Airbus operators hammered Airbus so hard over their initial responses to the 787. Add to that the maintenance and service life advantages the 787 will have over the A330, and the TOC (Total Operating Cost) should favor the 787 by a double-digit percentage.

I should have said avoiding the same perils of others in bankruptcy. They should emerge from this basically unscathed, with potential profits over 1.5 billion by late next year. It's easier to avoid fatality when you own most of your aircraft.

Quoting Manfredj (Reply 24): Has anyone considered the fact that the Europeans are much more conservative with their orders? Just like automobiles, a European won't order something on a whim, without first considering its impact on budgeting. American CEO's, however, seem to be able to justify sacrificing their airlines well being in order to have the "newest fleet." Northwest seems to be the only airline that realizes that the DC-9, although well over 30 years old, is their cash cow. Maybe this is the reason they have avoided chapter 11 this whole time. This always begs the question....why didn't any of the majors realize the potential of the 717? What a perfect aircraft. This is quite possibly the most underated aircraft of the 21st century.

Huh, I am really not sure what you are talking about.......but AA has been very conservative with its aircraft orders (maybe too conservative) and shed its 717 fleet due to high leasing rates; AA has never been bankrupt. NW, on the other hand, is currently operating under the protection of the bankruptcy court.

Why didnt the majors go for the 717.......wrong airplane at the wrong time, and, the mainline vs regional issues that I wont get into here.

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 23): Remember that the bulk of the 767's sales were in the US, Canada, and Japan.

That's a valid point. The real question is: why didn't the 767 sell well in Europe?

There's BA, of course. They have all of 21 763s to replace, so you could see a 20 787 order from them, or more if they decide on the 787-10.

Now AF for example, has only 16 A332s and no 767s, so would anything but the A359/10 or 787-10 appeal to them (29 A343 and 25 772 need to be replaced)?

KLM will have all of 10 A332s relatively new and no 767s, so they currently aren't in the market for replacing any 767 sized aircraft.

LH has only A306s close to 787-8/9 size, and those really serve a different market. They might replace them with 787-3, but I don't think so. They'd be more likely to add A332s to their A333s. Longer term, they will have to replace A340s and A333s, but not for a while, and right now, the 787 is too small (until the 787-10 is launched, at least).

VS, though not that big of an airline, also has no 767s to replace.

Quoting Manfredj (Reply 24): Just like automobiles, a European won't order something on a whim, without first considering its impact on budgeting. American CEO's, however, seem to be able to justify sacrificing their airlines well being in order to have the "newest fleet."

What a tremendously nuanced and insightful comparison of the European versus American airline industries. So the financial difficulties at American carriers was because of free-spending CEOs who bought hangars full of brand spankin' new airplanes on a whim? I knew it!

I can't think of any examples of this. Perhaps you can provide some?

Quoting Christao17 (Reply 30): I can't think of any examples of this. Perhaps you can provide some?

Continental! Oh, wait...Southwest? No? Hmm....

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 14): Quoting Keesje (Reply 10): The 787s 20% improvement over existing types probably didn´t mean A330. Yes, it does improve mean improved over the A-330. And 767.

How do we know this for certain??

You tend to forget the German Charter-/Low-Cost airlines Air Berlin and TUIfly...
Mr. Hunold has clearly indicated he's considering beefing up the fleet of LTU with either the 787 or A350-whatever the market-needs determine to be more urgent.
TUIfly has an open order for 11 unidentified aircraft with Boeing,supposed to be 787's,in line with the UK operator First Choice.
Also RAM (Royal Air Maroc) would be a potential candidate for more 787's as would be Air Algerie.

Quoting N328KF (Reply 31): Continental! Oh, wait...Southwest? No? Hmm....

Shock of shocks, the airlines with the newest fleets were doing the best here.

And in general, the EU airlines have newer fleets than the USA airlines. The big guys, for example are getting rid of their 737 classics ASAP and have already dumped the MD80s, while here in the USA, we have classics, MD80s and DC9s out the ass!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 29): That's a valid point. The real question is: why didn't the 767 sell well in Europe?There's BA, of course. They have all of 21 763s to replace, so you could see a 20 787 order from them, or more if they decide on the 787-10.Now AF for example, has only 16 A332s and no 767s, so would anything but the A359/10 or 787-10 appeal to them (29 A343 and 25 772 need to be replaced)?KLM will have all of 10 A332s relatively new and no 767s, so they currently aren't in the market for replacing any 767 sized aircraft.LH has only A306s close to 787-8/9 size, and those really serve a different market. They might replace them with 787-3, but I don't think so. They'd be more likely to add A332s to their A333s. Longer term, they will have to replace A340s and A333s, but not for a while, and right now, the 787 is too small (until the 787-10 is launched, at least).VS, though not that big of an airline, also has no 767s to replace.

   I think that this hits the nail on the head. This matches one of my thoughts earlier that one of the considerations that Airbus made when sizing the non-modified 330 version of the350, which is that many 767 operators had already ordered the 787 or were carriers that were much more likely to buy Boeing anyway (e.g. DL or AA). Because of the fact that many of the carriers you mentioned above, AF, KLM, LH, don't operate 767-sized planes, it isn't so clear to me why one would think that they would lean towards the 787 (all the above airlines other than BA fly Airbus widebodies, and at the smaller end, almost exclusively so). And like you, i'm not so sure that LH will see the need to buy 783s when they may be just as well off to "abuse" other planes on those few routes in order to gain flexibility. Whether to get 783s for LH, would in my mind, be wedded to whether they go with bigger 787s or 350s, not as a reason to go with the bigger order.

The question as to why more European carriers didn't go with the 767 is an interesting one. Is it that there is more competition on the same routes by multiple US carriers, and they can't fill bigger planes? Is it simply that a larger proportion of the pax on a given route would prefer a European carrier? Part of it may be due to the domestic purchases of the same airlines (i.e. that many US carriers could use the 767 on trans-continental routes) plus the sales of the 757? hmmm. an interesting question for sure.

cheers.

Quoting Christao17 (Reply 30): Quoting Manfredj,reply=24: Just like automobiles, a European won't order something on a whim, without first considering its impact on budgeting. American CEO's, however, seem to be able to justify sacrificing their airlines well being in order to have the "newest fleet." What a tremendously nuanced and insightful comparison of the European versus American airline industries. So the financial difficulties at American carriers was because of free-spending CEOs who bought hangars full of brand spankin' new airplanes on a whim? I knew it!

Actually, Manfredj does have somewhat of a point. UA, for example, placed a $22 billion order in 1990, just in time to lose almost $400 million in 1991 and $1 billion in 1992. And while UA recorded profits between $500 million (in 1995) and $1.3 billion (in 1998), UA also ordered scores of Airbus narrowbodies and Boeing widebodies (including a 22 frame 744, 772ER and 763ER order in 1998) which had to hurt cashflow.

I would counter with the question:

Why is the A380 selling so poorly in the US?

Simple answer: Demand

Other factor to consider: Europe may be holding out for the A350

Quoting Stitch (Reply 26): The 20% efficiency figure is indeed relative to the 767-300ER. Yet remember, the 767 is nowhere near the dog some would have you believe, which is why it still held a 2:3 sales margin against the A332. I have not seen the figures versus an A330-200, but I would expect them to be at least in the 10% range, otherwise Airbus would never have bothered with the original A350 nor would some Airbus operators hammered Airbus so hard over their initial responses to the 787. Add to that the maintenance and service life advantages the 787 will have over the A330, and the TOC (Total Operating Cost) should favor the 787 by a double-digit percentage.

It would be great to have some numbers however I believe that the 767-400ER is the closest competitor to the A332 and you'll see that the A332 has outsold that model by a much larger margin. Maintenace and service is something that remains to be seen, especially until the FAA approves the reduced maintenace schedule that Boeing is selling customers on. As to why Airbus should be bothered with the A350. Well, they really haven't bothered that much. It's still just a paper airplane, and a very vague one at that. But the market for that segment is just too huge to be ignored. In another 20 years the A330 just won't be good enough. The fact of the matter is that despite all the great things about the 787, the A330 is still selling like hot cakes. It can't be all that bad compared to the 787. No airline would be paying good money to buy an aircraft that is 20% less economical to operate than one that will be available in a just a couple of years.

Quoting Dw747400 (Reply 21): You might want to check your numbers. The 787 has greater capacity than equivalent A330 models (assuming 9 abreast economy).

Ah, but if you put 9 abreast you'll reduce significatly the amount of cargo space available and cargo has much greater yields than people.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 6): Virgin is said to be near a 787 order and I'm pretty sure my home team will be signing up soon

Where would VS plan on using these aircraft? Smaller UK airports such as Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow etc? Would be great if they would, even if it is to the more leisure routes such as Orlando, Barbados etc.

Also, you say that the some European airlines, such as BA, are waiting to see how the B787 and A350 compare, but isn't the A350 much larger than the B787? Different markets really aren't they?

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 38): No airline would be paying good money to buy an aircraft that is 20% less economical to operate than one that will be available in a just a couple of years.

LA and NH continue to buy 767-300ERs, though NH at least is also buying the 787.

Quoting Airbazar (Reply 15): The 20% figure is over the 767, not the A330. IIRC the improvement over the A330 is in the single digits.

If the improvement is in single digits, it can be as much as 9%. Boeing has stated that 8 of the 20% comes from the new engines. Therefore, Airbus should be able to re-engine the 330 and be within 1% of the 787, right? ... right? ... Hello?

Air Canada's Robert Milton said, "We have estimated the fuel burn and maintenance cost savings alone on the 787 to be approximately 30 percent versus the 767s they will replace." So maybe Boeing's 20% figure represents a degree of sandbagging.

Quoting AAL0616 (Reply 19): "duel-CEO" system

Duelling CEOs, eh? Now, that's picturesque!

Quoting Dank (Reply 35): The question as to why more European carriers didn't go with the 767 is an interesting one.

Many did, such as

Air France
Aer Lingus
Alitalia
British Airways
LOT
KLM
Aeroflot
SAS

...and others, but many have or will drop their 767s in favour of A330s.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 40): Quoting Airbazar (Reply 38): No airline would be paying good money to buy an aircraft that is 20% less economical to operate than one that will be available in a just a couple of years. LA and NH continue to buy 767-300ERs, though NH at least is also buying the 787.

LA is expected to order also

Quoting 1337Delta764 (Reply 23): Remember that the bulk of the 767's sales were in the US, Canada, and Japan. I will say that the same will be true for the 787. Delta and American have not yet ordered the 787, but they are soon likely to place orders. US Airways is taking a second look at the 787 vs. the A350XWB, as their previous A350 order was for the original A350 concept.

I went into the Boeing O & D portion of their site and of the 1,011 orders for the 767, 497 are from North America, East Asia is 176, Europe is 136, Oceania 75, and the rest 127.

So the 767 replacement would be expected to have a similar distribution provided that the model usages remain comparable. That would predict orders for about 70 from Europe at this point (13% of 514). But only 31 are ordered in the Europe region as defined by Boeing. However, only 97 are on order from North America, when 250 would be expected. Oceania is at 58 with only 38 predicted. East Asia has ordered 167 when 89 would be predicted.

The 787 is a separate definition of aircraft and the order period for the 787 is only a short window. I surmise that airlines in both Europe and North America have not been in conditions suitable for ordering, while Asia/Oceania has been. I think the real question is "Why don't the European airlines order either the 767 or 787". I think that answer lies in their route structures and hubs being short haul narrow bodies & large airplanes from major hubs to other continents. If they follow the same model in the future I would expect similar ordering patterns concentrating on the A320's 737's and A330's/A340's/A350's/A380's/777's/747's.

This distribution and the large hubs in Europe may have slanted Airbus's vision when deciding to do the 380. Their home market was trending to more and larger VLA's, it was the most visible to them and from groupthink aspects the future model of aviation. Meanwhile, the rest of the world was starting toward the higher frequency, branching to point-point and point-hub-point. I think the models that de emphasised the Hub-Hub model came of age in the post 911 assesments after Airbus committed to the 380.

By the way, what airline was AWAS in Austrailia which took deliveries up until 2001. Is it part of Qantas now. It lists Ansett separately.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 42): LA and NH continue to buy 767-300ERs, though NH at least is also buying the 787. LA is expected to order also

1 in 100 doesn't really make much of a point. For some odd reason the 767-300ER suits LA's needs right now. Maybe they don't need cargo capacity or as many seats. Some airlines are still buying Russian made planes too  

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 41): Quoting AAL0616 (Reply 19): "duel-CEO" system Duelling CEOs, eh? Now, that's picturesque!

You caught it! Maybe not so subtle a "faux-pas?"

From time to time, one might wonder if the French-German management structure is "dual" or "dueling?"

Perhaps both, in recent years, or at least since the successful A320 family shocked Boeing. Now perhaps Boeing has awakened and "the shoe is on the other foot."

Quoting EI321 (Reply 42): ...and others, but many have or will drop their 767s in favour of A330s.

Air France has already done so with 16 A332s.
KLM has all of 8+2 A330s and has no 767s at this point.
LOT is buying 787s, so they don't count?
BA has not dropped anything in favor of anything. Time will tell.
AZ hasn't bought A330s.
SAS has no planes at all in the 767 size at this point (A333 is bigger and they have a whopping 4 of them).
EI is a small airline with a very small widebody fleet, with 3 whole planes in the 767 size. And 1 on order.

You are going to include Aeroflot as an EU carrier with any bearing on market trends? Give me a break...
And they haven't bought A330s.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 46): Quoting EI321 (Reply 42): ...and others, but many have or will drop their 767s in favour of A330s. Air France has already done so with 16 A332s. KLM has all of 8+2 A330s and has no 767s at this point. LOT is buying 787s, so they don't count? BA has not dropped anything in favor of anything. Time will tell. AZ hasn't bought A330s. SAS has no planes at all in the 767 size at this point (A333 is bigger and they have a whopping 4 of them). EI is a small airline with a very small widebody fleet, with 3 whole planes in the 767 size. And 1 on order.

I think your missing what Im saying. Point im making is that many european airlines did oprtate 767s but no longer do. Yes, some are getting 787s but they obviously still have their 767s until the 787s arrive. The A330 is not the same size as the 767 but either is the 787, as airlines are moving towards larger aircraft in this sector. This does not change the fact that airlines have and will replace their 767s with A330s and will replace their 767s with 787s from 2008 onwards.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 46): You are going to include Aeroflot as an EU carrier with any bearing on market trends?

Nobody mentioned the EU.

Quoting AlanUK (Reply 5): As for AF and LH, they already have a nice fleet of A330s which simply doesn't need replacing just yet.

However LH is a possible candidate for launch customer of the 787-10, which could replace some of their A343s (except perhaps those which were delivered in the very late 90's and early 2000). Maybe Boeing could give them a very generous package for such an order, especially because LH is the launch customer of the 747-8I.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 47): The A330 is not the same size as the 767 but either is the 787, as airlines are moving towards larger aircraft in this sector.

The 788 is the replacement for the 763. It's a tad bigger, but not much. Airbus offers no plane in that size at this point beyond the A332.

As for the EU, Because Russia stretches all the way to the Pacific, it's a Pan Continental nation mostly in Asia.