Emirates will take delivery of the first 777X (a 777-9) in 2020. Previously it was expected that Lufthansa would be the first airline to take delivery of the 777X

SEATTLE: Emirates will be the first airline to receive Boeing’s all-new 777X aircraft, when it gets rolled out in 2020, a senior Boeing executive confirmed, putting an end to the debate on which of its seven customers were going to launch the US planemaker’s flagship aircraft.
Emirates will receive its first 777X aircraft in mid-2020, racing ahead of the previously-declared launch customer Lufthansa, which is now rethinking whether it needs all those jets it ordered.

http://gulfnews.com/business/aviation/e ... -1.2100774

¿LHR first destination?

And B787-10 order this year too.....in the article.

pabloeing wrote:

¿LHR first destination?

I don´t think so, it´s an all A380 destination, It will be a good publicity if they use to DEL or BOM, many Indians make jokes saying that EK only sends old aircrafts to India, so it will be a good advertising saying the EK is sending the newest model to India, also for crew training and aircraft rotation it could be good for a few days at least.

The article isn't clear though, does this mean EK will start taking the 777X in 2020 or it will be the first to take it slightly later? It seems that the original schedule was for EK to start taking it in mid 2020 but now it will take it earlier, so how much earlier are they talking about?

St he article says the rollout in 2020 and EK will be the first to get it. No surprise, EK was involved very much in the 777X program.

qf789 wrote:

Emirates will take delivery of the first 777X (a 777-9) in 2020. Previously it was expected that Lufthansa would be the first airline to take delivery of the 777X

SEATTLE: Emirates will be the first airline to receive Boeing’s all-new 777X aircraft, when it gets rolled out in 2020, a senior Boeing executive confirmed, putting an end to the debate on which of its seven customers were going to launch the US planemaker’s flagship aircraft.
Emirates will receive its first 777X aircraft in mid-2020, racing ahead of the previously-declared launch customer Lufthansa, which is now rethinking whether it needs all those jets it ordered.

http://gulfnews.com/business/aviation/e ... -1.2100774

Although LH was one of the launch customers (plural), being a "launch customer" doesn't mean you'll be the first to put it into service, it just means you're the first (or one of the first) to order it. I don't think you'll find a statement anywhere that indicates LH was going to be the first to put it into service.

Personally, I wouldn't take anything from this terribly-written article seriously. Waiting for a more established source.

pabloeing wrote:

¿LHR first destination?

I'll bet SEA will be the first destination. I read here sometime ago that EK has not sent the A380 to SEA so as to avoid pissing-off Boeing. It would make sense that they use the 777x DXB - SEA as the first route.

777law wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

¿LHR first destination?

I'll bet SEA will be the first destination. I read here sometime ago that EK has not sent the A380 to SEA so as to avoid pissing-off Boeing. It would make sense that they use the 777x DXB - SEA as the first route.

SEA can't accept the A380 for scheduled service, it hasn't invested in the necessary airfield upgrades to accommodate the A380 and has publicly said they aren't going unless there is major interest from multiple carriers for the type.

Interesting, I also assumed that Lufthansa was to be the first operator. What does this mean for Lufthansa? Nothing or is this some kind of sign?

777law wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

¿LHR first destination?

I'll bet SEA will be the first destination. I read here sometime ago that EK has not sent the A380 to SEA so as to avoid pissing-off Boeing. It would make sense that they use the 777x DXB - SEA as the first route.

Was thinking exactly the same.

Dutchy wrote:

Interesting, I also assumed that Lufthansa was to be the first operator. What does this mean for Lufthansa? Nothing or is this some kind of sign?

Keep in mind this statement came from Boeing without any confirmation from Emirates. For non-777X-believers like me, it appears Boeing is nudging Emirates to take delivery.

Considering they have about half the orders I'm not surprised

FlightGlobal is now reporting EK will be launch customer of 777-9

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -9-441865/

qf789 wrote:

FlightGlobal is now reporting EK will be launch customer of 777-9

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... -9-441865/

Actually said "launch operator" which is not the same as launch customer -- in fact EK wasn't one of the launch customers. Nobody really uses the term "launch operator". Nor can I find anywhere that Boeing said LH would be the first to receive the airplane.

7BOEING7 wrote:

Actually said "launch operator" which is not the same as launch customer -- in fact EK wasn't one of the launch customers. Nobody really uses the term "launch operator". Nor can I find anywhere that Boeing said LH would be the first to receive the airplane.

If this doesn't mean that LH was supposed to be the first to receive the airplane I don't know what it is:

With the selection of the modern and highly efficient Boeing 777X for its long-haul fleet, Lufthansa will once again be a launch customer for a new Boeing aircraft program.

Source: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/custom ... -777x.page

But let's see if this is going to be updated.

7BOEING7 wrote:

Nobody really uses the term "launch operator".

It's common usage in Airbus press releases.

KarelXWB wrote:

7BOEING7 wrote:

Nobody really uses the term "launch operator".

It's common usage in Airbus press releases.

Learn something every day.

Finn350 wrote:

If this doesn't mean that LH was supposed to be the first to receive the airplane I don't know what it is:

With the selection of the modern and highly efficient Boeing 777X for its long-haul fleet, Lufthansa will once again be a launch customer for a new Boeing aircraft program.

Source: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/custom ... -777x.page

But let's see if this is going to be updated.

It says "..a launch customer.." as in one of several, so nothing that would confirm LH as the first to operate. If it said "the launch customer" I'd agree with you.

pabloeing wrote:

And B787-10 order this year too.....in the article.

To be clear, the article uses implied information and allusion to imply an EK 787-10 order. Since my ex-wife uses that tactic to never lie, just imply to get what she wantsby implications, I don't trust the source.

Lightsaber

lightsaber wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

And B787-10 order this year too.....in the article.

To be clear, the article uses implied information and allusion to imply an EK 787-10 order. Since my ex-wife uses that tactic to never lie, just imply to get what she wantsby implications, I don't trust the source.

Lightsaber

To be clear, the article makes no reference to a B787-10 order whatsoever, and rightly so, as there isn't one.
Someone is getting a bit excited.

The article's author (Shweta Jain) states that an analyst (Addison Schonland of Airinsight) thinks the 787 deal is "in the bag".
However, the statements of Schonland that are actually quoted in the article say no such thing. In fact he suggests Emirates should select the A350
Fair use extract :-

Schonland, too, reckons that a 787 deal is in the bag.
“Boeing is on a roll on the 787 this year, so it could happen,” he said.
“But the A350 is proving to be an excellent aircraft.
If Emirates selects the 777X then to be safe they should go for the A350. If they don’t balance these two they can see less aggressive pricing. Emirates must keep these two at each other’s throats,” he added.

Nothing says a 787-10 order won't happen of course

Rgds

wingman wrote:

Finn350 wrote:

If this doesn't mean that LH was supposed to be the first to receive the airplane I don't know what it is:

With the selection of the modern and highly efficient Boeing 777X for its long-haul fleet, Lufthansa will once again be a launch customer for a new Boeing aircraft program.

Source: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/custom ... -777x.page

But let's see if this is going to be updated.

It says "..a launch customer.." as in one of several, so nothing that would confirm LH as the first to operate. If it said "the launch customer" I'd agree with you.

Launch customer means they were the first to order the airplane and nothing more. In most cases the launch customer is also the first to fly it home but that is not part of the definition. Etihad is also listed as a "launch customer" for the 777X.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/custom ... -777x.page

Well I would expect that to be the case given the fact that they've ordered 150 of them...

7BOEING7 wrote:

Launch customer means they were the first to order the airplane and nothing more. In most cases the launch customer is also the first to fly it home but that is not part of the definition. Etihad is also listed as a "launch customer" for the 777X.

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/custom ... -777x.page

Ok, I agree that based on the quote LH is just “a” launch customer.

astuteman wrote:

lightsaber wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

And B787-10 order this year too.....in the article.

To be clear, the article uses implied information and allusion to imply an EK 787-10 order. Since my ex-wife uses that tactic to never lie, just imply to get what she wantsby implications, I don't trust the source.

Lightsaber

To be clear, the article makes no reference to a B787-10 order whatsoever, and rightly so, as there isn't one.
Someone is getting a bit excited.

The article's author (Shweta Jain) states that an analyst (Addison Schonland of Airinsight) thinks the 787 deal is "in the bag".
However, the statements of Schonland that are actually quoted in the article say no such thing. In fact he suggests Emirates should select the A350
Fair use extract :-

Schonland, too, reckons that a 787 deal is in the bag.
“Boeing is on a roll on the 787 this year, so it could happen,” he said.
“But the A350 is proving to be an excellent aircraft.
If Emirates selects the 777X then to be safe they should go for the A350. If they don’t balance these two they can see less aggressive pricing. Emirates must keep these two at each other’s throats,” he added.

Nothing says a 787-10 order won't happen of course

Rgds

What a strange article. First, I thought EK announced they were putting off the 787 vs A350 decision. Then it says if they select the 777X. They already have selected the 777X! This very article is about them being the launch operator.

dtw2hyd wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Interesting, I also assumed that Lufthansa was to be the first operator. What does this mean for Lufthansa? Nothing or is this some kind of sign?

For non-777X-believers like me

Mm, indeed

It's going to be pretty funny watching "non-777X-believers" here on A.net talk about how the 777X was a mistake for the next 15 years while it turns out to be a success.

Humble Pie will be a common dish on here in the years ahead

migair54 wrote:

It will be a good publicity if they use to DEL or BOM, many Indians make jokes saying that EK only sends old aircrafts to India

I get how that may appear, but I would suspect training will be on shorter gulf ports and the aircraft deployed on ULH ASAP where it should generate the most savings. The reason for using older aircraft to India is the less efficient aircraft are not that less efficient short/medium haul, the inefficiency shines on long haul routes.

Boeing778X wrote:

It's going to be pretty funny watching "non-777X-believers" here on A.net talk about how the 777X was a mistake for the next 15 years while it turns out to be a success.

Humble Pie will be a common dish on here in the years ahead

We have seen many bold predictions made on a.net over the years (both positive and negative) some of them turn out to be correct others are forgotten.

We know even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Boeing778X wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

Interesting, I also assumed that Lufthansa was to be the first operator. What does this mean for Lufthansa? Nothing or is this some kind of sign?

For non-777X-believers like me

Mm, indeed

It's going to be pretty funny watching "non-777X-believers" here on A.net talk about how the 777X was a mistake for the next 15 years while it turns out to be a success.

Humble Pie will be a common dish on here in the years ahead

I count myself in the skeptic category, nevertheless I hope to eat a lot of humble pie. We could go ahead with the order though, if it doesn't turn out quite the success we all hope for, there are some 77X-believers whom could have a bite or two themselves.

Whilst it would be wrong to join another click bait '380 is dead' thread.There is little doubt that something will have to give fairly soon if it is to have a future.Boeing have already stated that they have sold their last 748i.I would only disagree with the word 'sold'.I don't think in actual fact they 'sold' any at all.
There are however many routes/airlines that can regularly handle 400 pax aircraft so the market is there.If not the 779 then what? (777-10??).So it's really hard not to see it having a long and successful future.I hope it will.
IMHO Emirates is the right airline to kick off this bird.They effectively designed the spec's.The 777 is already their main aircraft.I expect its role to only grow in the future.

Boeing778X wrote:

Mm, indeed

It's going to be pretty funny watching "non-777X-believers" here on A.net talk about how the 777X was a mistake for the next 15 years while it turns out to be a success.

Humble Pie will be a common dish on here in the years ahead

Better to clearly state and stick with your opinion, rather than moving the needle all over to end up on the right side of the discussion.

zeke wrote:

migair54 wrote:

It will be a good publicity if they use to DEL or BOM, many Indians make jokes saying that EK only sends old aircrafts to India

I get how that may appear, but I would suspect training will be on shorter gulf ports and the aircraft deployed on ULH ASAP where it should generate the most savings. The reason for using older aircraft to India is the less efficient aircraft are not that less efficient short/medium haul, the inefficiency shines on long haul routes.

Boeing778X wrote:

It's going to be pretty funny watching "non-777X-believers" here on A.net talk about how the 777X was a mistake for the next 15 years while it turns out to be a success.

Humble Pie will be a common dish on here in the years ahead

We have seen many bold predictions made on a.net over the years (both positive and negative) some of them turn out to be correct others are forgotten.

We know even a broken clock is right twice a day.

Yes, my idea was sending the B777X to BOM or DEL for 6-7 days so some crew can get some hours on the plane and then start the medium haul, I don´t think Ek will go to ULH until they have 3-4 frames so they can do at least 1 daily destination. maybe they can use for SIN, KUL or other 7-8 hours sector until few more are in the fleet.
Many of the B77W that EK use in ULH sectors are very new frames, so they are quite efficient usually.

parapente wrote:

Whilst it would be wrong to join another click bait '380 is dead' thread.There is little doubt that something will have to give fairly soon if it is to have a future.Boeing have already stated that they have sold their last 748i.I would only disagree with the word 'sold'.I don't think in actual fact they 'sold' any at all.
There are however many routes/airlines that can regularly handle 400 pax aircraft so the market is there.If not the 779 then what? (777-10??).So it's really hard not to see it having a long and successful future.I hope it will.
IMHO Emirates is the right airline to kick off this bird.They effectively designed the spec's.The 777 is already their main aircraft.I expect its role to only grow in the future.

For whatever it’s worth I have heard two things out of people I know in Boeing.

1. That the 9 is exceeding expectations in performance as it moves along and is being simulated.

2. That there is enough confidence in this margin that a 777-10X can and would be built if a customer wants to buy enough of them. Basically that if Emirates decides to make it their go forward biggest aircraft there is enough margin in the basic design to get the 10 done without a ton of issues.

Again this is just what I have heard from a couple people who should be in a position to know. Could all be bogus and they are being lied to internally.

pabloeing wrote:

And B787-10 order this year too.....in the article.

Nevermind what EK thinks about it or decides

Dutchy wrote:

Boeing778X wrote:

dtw2hyd wrote:

For non-777X-believers like me

Mm, indeed

It's going to be pretty funny watching "non-777X-believers" here on A.net talk about how the 777X was a mistake for the next 15 years while it turns out to be a success.

Humble Pie will be a common dish on here in the years ahead

I count myself in the skeptic category, nevertheless I hope to eat a lot of humble pie. We could go ahead with the order though, if it doesn't turn out quite the success we all hope for, there are some 77X-believers whom could have a bite or two themselves.

It could, but I doubt it. I'll come back to serve you some soon

bigjku wrote:

For whatever it’s worth I have heard two things out of people I know in Boeing.

1. That the 9 is exceeding expectations in performance as it moves along and is being simulated.

2. That there is enough confidence in this margin that a 777-10X can and would be built if a customer wants to buy enough of them. Basically that if Emirates decides to make it their go forward biggest aircraft there is enough margin in the basic design to get the 10 done without a ton of issues.

Still think they should have chosen 80m for the length of the 777-9 to begin with. IMO, that plane needs every seat it can get to compete with the A350-1000 and making it only 2.6m longer than a 777-300ER was a mistake. A 6m stretch to 79.9m would have worked out better, IMO (the 777-8 is a ~6m stretch of the 777-200LR).

If the numbers look really favorable for an 80m 777-10, be interesting to see if Boeing and the customers come to an agreement to just make the 777-9 that long (as what happened with the 737-7's length extension).

Stitch wrote:

If the numbers look really favorable for an 80m 777-10, be interesting to see if Boeing and the customers come to an agreement to just make the 777-9 that long (as what happened with the 737-7's length extension).

Seems like it would be too late for that, no? Besides, I think EK would want the performance that comes with the shorter plane.

777law wrote:

pabloeing wrote:

¿LHR first destination?

I'll bet SEA will be the first destination. I read here sometime ago that EK has not sent the A380 to SEA so as to avoid pissing-off Boeing. It would make sense that they use the 777x DXB - SEA as the first route.

SEA isn't A380 compliant. Not sure the demand is there anyway.

Stitch wrote:

Still think they should have chosen 80m for the length of the 777-9 to begin with. IMO, that plane needs every seat it can get to compete with the A350-1000 and making it only 2.6m longer than a 777-300ER was a mistake. A 6m stretch to 79.9m would have worked out better, IMO (the 777-8 is a ~6m stretch of the 777-200LR).

If the numbers look really favorable for an 80m 777-10, be interesting to see if Boeing and the customers come to an agreement to just make the 777-9 that long (as what happened with the 737-7's length extension).

Actually we may find that they should not have done a stretch at all -- and kept the same length as the 77W. Clearly there is a resistance by carriers to push passenger capacity closer to 400...it makes the aircraft less flexible. Only EK seems to require 400+ passengers (for now). Long-haul aircraft are increasingly providing more floor-space for lie-flat business-class and economy-plus...Y-class is being reduced -- so a shorter 777-9 loses a few Y-class rows, but is lighter and has less wetted area, maybe smaller engines or less runway required. The 777-9 is very heavy,190 tons, a stretch would make it even more of a beast.

That's no great loss for the airline which primarily makes money from roomier seats and Econ-plus. Anyhow, in the future those budget Y-class passengers may be flying new long-haul low-cost airlines like Norwegian and AirAsia-X. We may find 789 and A359 are the future long-haul flexible sweet spot. The 777-9 and even the A350-1000 may be outliers.

cledaybuck wrote:

Stitch wrote:

If the numbers look really favorable for an 80m 777-10, be interesting to see if Boeing and the customers come to an agreement to just make the 777-9 that long (as what happened with the 737-7's length extension).

Seems like it would be too late for that, no? Besides, I think EK would want the performance that comes with the shorter plane.

EK has been pestering Boeing for a longer 777 and asked Boeing about a possible "777-400ER" before Boeing decided to go with the 777X.

QuarkFly wrote:

Actually we may find that they should not have done a stretch at all -- and kept the same length as the 77W.

That would have been a non-starter. The A330neo can compete with the 787 as well as it does due to them being close in empty weight and using (effectively) the same engines and lower wing loading. The 777-300ER is upwards of 20,000kg heavier than the A350-1000 in identical cabin configurations.

bigjku wrote:

parapente wrote:

Whilst it would be wrong to join another click bait '380 is dead' thread.There is little doubt that something will have to give fairly soon if it is to have a future.Boeing have already stated that they have sold their last 748i.I would only disagree with the word 'sold'.I don't think in actual fact they 'sold' any at all.
There are however many routes/airlines that can regularly handle 400 pax aircraft so the market is there.If not the 779 then what? (777-10??).So it's really hard not to see it having a long and successful future.I hope it will.
IMHO Emirates is the right airline to kick off this bird.They effectively designed the spec's.The 777 is already their main aircraft.I expect its role to only grow in the future.

For whatever it’s worth I have heard two things out of people I know in Boeing.

1. That the 9 is exceeding expectations in performance as it moves along and is being simulated.

2. That there is enough confidence in this margin that a 777-10X can and would be built if a customer wants to buy enough of them. Basically that if Emirates decides to make it their go forward biggest aircraft there is enough margin in the basic design to get the 10 done without a ton of issues.

Again this is just what I have heard from a couple people who should be in a position to know. Could all be bogus and they are being lied to internally.

If the -9 is beating spec, I wonder what that means for the -8...

ikolkyo wrote:

bigjku wrote:

parapente wrote:

Whilst it would be wrong to join another click bait '380 is dead' thread.There is little doubt that something will have to give fairly soon if it is to have a future.Boeing have already stated that they have sold their last 748i.I would only disagree with the word 'sold'.I don't think in actual fact they 'sold' any at all.
There are however many routes/airlines that can regularly handle 400 pax aircraft so the market is there.If not the 779 then what? (777-10??).So it's really hard not to see it having a long and successful future.I hope it will.
IMHO Emirates is the right airline to kick off this bird.They effectively designed the spec's.The 777 is already their main aircraft.I expect its role to only grow in the future.

For whatever it’s worth I have heard two things out of people I know in Boeing.

1. That the 9 is exceeding expectations in performance as it moves along and is being simulated.

2. That there is enough confidence in this margin that a 777-10X can and would be built if a customer wants to buy enough of them. Basically that if Emirates decides to make it their go forward biggest aircraft there is enough margin in the basic design to get the 10 done without a ton of issues.

Again this is just what I have heard from a couple people who should be in a position to know. Could all be bogus and they are being lied to internally.

If the -9 is beating spec, I wonder what that means for the -8...

Could be good for QF.

bigjku wrote:

For whatever it’s worth I have heard two things out of people I know in Boeing.

1. That the 9 is exceeding expectations in performance as it moves along and is being simulated.

Yes, the "-9", a paper airplane...maybe a computer-sim airplane, is beating performance specs...

The Sim-City simulations on my computer always beat specs too...great places to live !!

QuarkFly wrote:

Yes, the "-9", a paper airplane...maybe a computer-sim airplane, is beating performance specs...

The Sim-City simulations on my computer always beat specs too...great places to live !!

Well it never was paper, since it was made in computers using CATIA. And the wing for the first one is actually in production so it's not even a "virtual" plane anymore.

QuarkFly wrote:

bigjku wrote:

For whatever it’s worth I have heard two things out of people I know in Boeing.

1. That the 9 is exceeding expectations in performance as it moves along and is being simulated.

Yes, the "-9", a paper airplane...maybe a computer-sim airplane, is beating performance specs...

The Sim-City simulations on my computer always beat specs too...great places to live !!

Isn't this the 21st century in action? This is what technology has made possible. Airbus and Boeing have a much better understanding of what they're yet-to-be-built frames will do than ever before.

Stitch wrote:

QuarkFly wrote:

Yes, the "-9", a paper airplane...maybe a computer-sim airplane, is beating performance specs...

The Sim-City simulations on my computer always beat specs too...great places to live !!

Well it never was paper, since it was made in computers using CATIA. And the wing for the first one is actually in production so it's not even a "virtual" plane anymore.

Engine is also starting to get more hours built up as well. Not saying it is certain. Just something I heard.

migair54 wrote:

It will be a good publicity if they use to DEL or BOM, many Indians make jokes saying that EK only sends old aircrafts to India, so it will be a good advertising saying the EK is sending the newest model to India

Old saying in India: Monkey does not change its dance so soon. The Emirates baloongras have done well so far by bribing South Asian ministers and sending their oldest clapped out aircraft on these routes. Why should they change their dance now?

7BOEING7 wrote:

KarelXWB wrote:

7BOEING7 wrote:

Nobody really uses the term "launch operator".

It's common usage in Airbus press releases.

Learn something every day.

Here are a few examples:

http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-re ... cabin.html
http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-re ... ional.html
http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-re ... urope.html
http://www.airbus.com/newsroom/press-re ... 21neo.html

etc

BawliBooch wrote:

Old saying in India: Monkey does not change its dance so soon. The Emirates baloongras have done well so far by bribing South Asian ministers and sending their oldest clapped out aircraft on these routes. Why should they change their dance now?

They cannot send B777X to India anyway, they are already over their BASA limits when they replaced 773s with 77Ws. Jet Airways already filed a complaint.

bigjku wrote:

1. That the 9 is exceeding expectations in performance as it moves along and is being simulated.

That's good to know. I am curious though, what part is outperforming its expectation? Did they manage to achieve an OEW that's lighter than expected? or wings aerodynamics maybe?