ABMUC wrote:

JayinKitsap wrote:

I have thoughts that Boeing 'teased' Airbus with the timing of this recent launch. If Boeing is in discussion with say UPS and FedEX over what they really want in a new build freighter, as well as the other current operators to optimize the 77xF for the current and predicted market, it may not hurt Boeing in terms of large orders holding off for a year or two.

In this case, Boeing would enjoy competing against the frozen specification of the A350, the ability to adjust things to be better in this, better in that kind of thing.

Any company making decisions based on being teased would be out of Business.

When you have only one competitor, that you’re constantly marking your products against, that can tend to happen

If that would be true it works both ways...

JayinKitsap wrote:

I have thoughts that Boeing 'teased' Airbus with the timing of this recent launch. If Boeing is in discussion with say UPS and FedEX over what they really want in a new build freighter, as well as the other current operators to optimize the 77xF for the current and predicted market, it may not hurt Boeing in terms of large orders holding off for a year or two.

In this case, Boeing would enjoy competing against the frozen specification of the A350, the ability to adjust things to be better in this, better in that kind of thing.

don't forget that airbus is in talks with both for the A350F

2175301 wrote:

However, given Airbus's previous history of claiming major progress where there was none... It's fair to be skeptical at this time.

I'm going to look at what is ordered within 60 days for the LOI and 90 days for the MOU. After that amount of time the chances of them being converted to orders is fairly low.

ALC was not in isolation, it was for 25 A220-300s, 55 A321neos, 20 A321XLRs, 4 A330neos and 7 A350Fs.

I wonder what customer Air Lease Corporation could have lined up for the A350 freighter. Typically the large carriers like 5X and FX place direct orders for freighters. Maybe someone like MH?

zeke wrote:

2175301 wrote:

However, given Airbus's previous history of claiming major progress where there was none... It's fair to be skeptical at this time.

I'm going to look at what is ordered within 60 days for the LOI and 90 days for the MOU. After that amount of time the chances of them being converted to orders is fairly low.

ALC was not in isolation, it was for 25 A220-300s, 55 A321neos, 20 A321XLRs, 4 A330neos and 7 A350Fs.

I'm well aware of the numbers for the various models Zeke. In its own way it makes it a bit more suspicious.

I am quite sure that ALC can appropriately place 100 or so passenger airliners.

I'm scratching my head on which of those airlines would want an A350F, or which airlines would have approached ALC for possible rental of an A350F.

To me its quite plausible that the A350F was tossed into the LOI just so ALC could go out to airlines and quote a lease rate and see if they could find clients who would take them (similar to Amedeo - except its being called appropriately a LOI instead of an "order").

I have little doubt that ALC will sign an order for various passenger aircraft out of the LOI. The final numbers of each aircraft type may change, but It would be unusual for that part of the LOI to vanish. I'm very curious if there will actually be any A350F orders from this LOI. Time will tell.

2175301 wrote:

zeke wrote:

2175301 wrote:

However, given Airbus's previous history of claiming major progress where there was none... It's fair to be skeptical at this time.

I'm going to look at what is ordered within 60 days for the LOI and 90 days for the MOU. After that amount of time the chances of them being converted to orders is fairly low.

ALC was not in isolation, it was for 25 A220-300s, 55 A321neos, 20 A321XLRs, 4 A330neos and 7 A350Fs.

I'm well aware of the numbers for the various models Zeke. In its own way it makes it a bit more suspicious.

I am quite sure that ALC can appropriately place 100 or so passenger airliners.

I'm scratching my head on which of those airlines would want an A350F, or which airlines would have approached ALC for possible rental of an A350F.

To me its quite plausible that the A350F was tossed into the LOI just so ALC could go out to airlines and quote a lease rate and see if they could find clients who would take them (similar to Amedeo - except its being called appropriately a LOI instead of an "order").

I have little doubt that ALC will sign an order for various passenger aircraft out of the LOI. The final numbers of each aircraft type may change, but It would be unusual for that part of the LOI to vanish. I'm very curious if there will actually be any A350F orders from this LOI. Time will tell.

If the LOI was based on Airliner interest, Asiana followed by Singapore would top the list. Asiana and Airbus negotiating moving deposits from passenger orders to freighters and then ALC assuming costs and delivering as a lease would solve the b744bdsf replacement need at a time when Korean/Asiana's cash constraints would otherwise inhibit freighter orders in the short-term.
Singapore's utility/need tilts 777XF, however, the a350f is an operational fit.

2175301 wrote:

I'm scratching my head on which of those airlines would want an A350F, or which airlines would have approached ALC for possible rental of an A350F.

To me its quite plausible that the A350F was tossed into the LOI just so ALC could go out to airlines and quote a lease rate and see if they could find clients who would take them (similar to Amedeo - except its being called appropriately a LOI instead of an "order").

I have little doubt that ALC will sign an order for various passenger aircraft out of the LOI. The final numbers of each aircraft type may change, but It would be unusual for that part of the LOI to vanish. I'm very curious if there will actually be any A350F orders from this LOI. Time will tell.

ALC itself mentioned that they had proposals for both the A350F and B777XF on the table and decided in favor of the former. That implies that the decision to move forward with the freighter purchase was one taken by ALC backed by commercial consideration, and not one "push on them for the PR". If they have already lined up a client or have decided to order on a speculative base: we don´t know. I think they have some firm interest from cargo airlines plus decided that an additional A350F gives them more overall flexibility with the A350 order book as a whole (conversion rights).

Considering that even cargo airlines such as Lufthansa Cargo have decided to lease metal these (e.g. they two A321 P2F will be leases) it will be close to impossible to exclude airlines at the moment. My guess is that a current B777-200LRF or A330-200F operator is the most likely candidate, but given the growth of the market currently all avenues are open. I would only discount any of the large integrators currently (UPS, FedEx, DHL, SF, Amazon).

Revelation wrote:

2175301 wrote:

Ertro wrote:

There is no indication that Airbus performs these kind of stunts.

There most certainly is: The A380 Amedeo "order" for 20 A380's.

Only years later did it become known that this was only a marketing option that if Amedeo found people willing to long term lease an A380 that Amedeo had an option to purchase up to 20 A380's for such leases.

Yep, stunt indeed. That Amedeo "order" stayed on the books for many years and was made to disappear into thin air at Airbus's convenience.

I'd like to think the current regime is better than the baloney castle era one, but this launch without orders and orders without signed contracts stuff makes me think they are not.

Airbus have launched programmes before without orders and are quite within their rights to do so.
They clearly had an Authority to Offer, as they have received responses.

Are you genuinely suggesting that the ALC LOI is a phantom in the same way that the Amedeo A380 order was - designed to give the illusion of propping up an entire programme that was at death's door?
Do you think that the A350F is sufficiently inadequate or ill-aimed to require that support (notwithstanding SUH giving it a pretty strong endorsement)
What do you really think the likelihood is of ALC not coming through with the firm order are?
Do they have a track record of doing so?

I certainly agree that it can take a long time to migrate from an MOU/LOI
From memory, the huge EK 777X order was "ordered" at the 2013 DAS, but did not appear in the Boeing order book until July 2014 according to the Boeing website.
It also took a long time for the last of the 737-10 MAX orders/conversions to finally hit the books
But they pretty much all did, eventually.
From my seat, this all looks like very ordinary normal business for a new derivative

Personally I think the A350F ticks a box that it's smaller sibling, the A330F didn't.
I think the A330F fell down the crack between the hugely demanded code D freighters like the 767 and A300, and the big code E freighters like the 777 and the 747. It is too much physical aircraft for what it lifts (which I think the 787 would also be, for the same reasons)
The A350F might be code E, but it lifts 100+ tonnes as opposed to the 60 odd of the A330F.
Solid product IMO, and a nice fit both for the dedicated freighter firms, and big airlines that already operate the A350

I'm going to make a prediction that Amedeo don't get to order any A350F's

Rgds

To compare ALC to Amedeo is an insult to ALC.

ALC would not announce an LOI if they are not fully behind this order and are convinced that they will place these planes at customers (if they haven't placed these A350Fs yet). They will not allow Airbus to use them just to have a launch customer at an airshow. One thing that might play a role here is the Sustainability Fund that ALC and Airbus announced together with the orders. The A350F order might have been linked to this fund they are setting up. This not to play this order down, I would actually see it as an extra sign of confidence from ALC in the A350F development.

We'll see in the coming months in which tempo more deals will be announced. For now it has not been the big bang launch that was expected in some publications. Clearly Airbus decided that they didn't need the 50 orders to launch. But it seems that they are confident enough that more will come soon enough.

Momo1435 wrote:

To compare ALC to Amedeo is an insult to ALC.

ALC would not announce an LOI if they are not fully behind this order and are convinced that they will place these planes at customers (if they haven't placed these A350Fs yet). They will not allow Airbus to use them just to have a launch customer at an airshow. One thing that might play a role here is the Sustainability Fund that ALC and Airbus announced together with the orders. The A350F order might have been linked to this fund they are setting up. This not to play this order down, I would actually see it as an extra sign of confidence from ALC in the A350F development.

We'll see in the coming months in which tempo more deals will be announced. For now it has not been the big bang launch that was expected in some publications. Clearly Airbus decided that they didn't need the 50 orders to launch. But it seems that they are confident enough that more will come soon enough.

I don't think a big bang announcement for the A350F was either expected or promoted. That was for another freighter to be launched at Dubai. The downplaying of the A350F seems mostly intended to get the spotlights away from that dissapointment. And to mistify the fact one OE has the entrepreneurship and strenght to launch a new aircraft because they believe in it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Boeing+ ... nt=gws-wiz

Boeing has to do something. Earlier on I proposes PIP ing the 777F engines together with GE to make sure the 777F is ICAO CO2 2027 emission compliant and make sure the 767 becomes / remains the prefered 50-60t freighter by finally giving it GEnX-2B63B engines.


https://aircraft.airbus.com/en/aircraft/freighters/a350f

keesje wrote:

I don't think a big bang announcement for the A350F was either expected or promoted. That was for another freighter to be launched at Dubai. The downplaying of the A350F seems mostly intended to get the spotlights away from that dissapointment.

To be fair neither Airbus nor Boeing officially stated that they need a certain number of orders to launch their respective projects (looking back on how this started the "50 orders" was a claim from analysist, but not from Airbus), or that it would actually launch at a specific date.

I must admit that I was a bit surprised that Airbus did go out into the market with two rather small announcements and not a big integrator, and Boeing not launching the 777XF. However, the longer I think about it it becomes obvious that

a) the integrators want to see what Boeing is really going to offer with a clearly defined 777XF prior placing any order towards either A or B (or both)
b) Airbus is confident enough that even a trickle of small- and medium-sized orders is sufficient to push forward (which - in itself - is a message towards B & prospective clients & existing pax airlines)
c) Boeing´s proposal is - so far - not the economic slam dunk they have been looking - and hoping - for, and needs further refinement.

I am very confident that the 777XF will be launched as it gives Boeing and several airlines a somewhat elegant way out of the current delay-situation and evolved market, and give a proper long-term replacement of the current 777LRs. Big difference will be this time that a viable competitor is around, actually giving airlines an alternative for the first time.

I think Boeing will go the same way with the 777XF vs. 350F as it did with the 779 vs. 3510. Now it knows what Airbus is offering, it will go bigger to improve the XF's economics.

We could well see mixed freight fleets in the future as we do with pax airlines. Size matters for some freight routes, but with fuel costs on the rise, right-sizing may well prove more profitable than flying empty space around on thinner routes.

keesje wrote:

I don't think a big bang announcement for the A350F was either expected or promoted. That was for another freighter to be launched at Dubai. The downplaying of the A350F seems mostly intended to get the spotlights away from that dissapointment. And to mistify the fact one OE has the entrepreneurship and strenght to launch a new aircraft because they believe in it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Boeing+ ... nt=gws-wiz

The talk about the number of orders for an A350F launch happened well before the Dubai Airshow was on people's minds.

The early publications about a possible launch did mention the 50 orders, which resulted in a whole discussion here on the forum which customer would order 50 at once. Which of course was nonsense as nobody even suggested that Airbus wanted 1 costumer for such a large order to launch. This was before Airbus confirmed the launch without announcing orders.

Before the airshow there were also publications that mentioned several possible customers, you even mentioned some these customers in this thread in the run up to the airshow. None of those potential customers did announce an order yet. The 2 orders that now have been announced are from customers that were never mentioned, so they were a surprise to many. But this has created room for speculations of course why they did not order yet.

You don't have to always mention Boeing (both what they did or not do) when you talk about the A350F launch, that's counterproductive in this discussion.

Momo1435 wrote:

keesje wrote:

I don't think a big bang announcement for the A350F was either expected or promoted. That was for another freighter to be launched at Dubai. The downplaying of the A350F seems mostly intended to get the spotlights away from that dissapointment. And to mistify the fact one OE has the entrepreneurship and strenght to launch a new aircraft because they believe in it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Boeing+ ... nt=gws-wiz

The talk about the number of orders for an A350F launch happened well before the Dubai Airshow was on people's minds.

The early publications about a possible launch did mention the 50 orders, which resulted in a whole discussion here on the forum which customer would order 50 at once. Which of course was nonsense as nobody even suggested that Airbus wanted 1 costumer for such a large order to launch. This was before Airbus confirmed the launch without announcing orders.

Before the airshow there were also publications that mentioned several possible customers, you even mentioned some these customers in this thread in the run up to the airshow. None of those potential customers did announce an order yet. The 2 orders that now have been announced are from customers that were never mentioned, so they were a surprise to many. But this has created room for speculations of course why they did not order yet.

You don't have to always mention Boeing (both what they did or not do) when you talk about the A350F launch, that's counterproductive in this discussion.

"you even mentioned some these customers in this thread in the run up to the airshow" That's the kind of mind playing we increasingly see. Yes I mentioned SQ and Korean as potential A350F customers. But to link it to me in one sentence with the Dubai Airshow is the kind of perception management we should try to stay away from IMO. Let's leave that to spindoctotors.

From their website and promotion materials it is clear Airbus is focussing it's sales efforts mostly on current A350 operators.


https://aircraft.airbus.com/en/aircraft/freighters/a350f#integrate

@ keesje
Are you perhaps payed by the Airbus PR department ?
A little bit more non-biased approach would be more convincing.
Ofcourse Airbus is trying to hit Boeing at it's most dominant (almost a monopoly !) cargo aircraft position.
I would do the same , if your contender is on it's knees.
Boeing is fragile at this moment in time because they have made (and are still making !) crucial mistakes, starting with the 787 introduction/ certification, followed by the 737Max Grounding and now the 777X certification and the 787 production issues.

But I still don't see any firm orders for the A350F yet, even after 35 pages about this subject in this thread.
MOU's and LOI's are an invention of the airline purchase departments (and are used for PR reasons by the OEM PR departments) to lower the purchase price of you future aircraft order.
On top of that : The CMA GCM MOU is most probably (French) politically driven.

747classic wrote:

@ keesje
Are you perhaps payed by the Airbus PR department ?
A little bit more non-biased approach would be more convincing.
Ofcourse Airbus is trying to hit Boeing at it's most dominant (almost a monopoly !) cargo aircraft position.
I would do the same , if your contender is on it's knees.
Boeing is fragile at this moment in time because they have made (and are still making !) crucial mistakes, starting with the 787 introduction/ certification, followed by the 737Max Grounding and now the 777X certification and the 787 production issues.

But I still don't see any firm orders for the A350F yet, even after 35 pages about this subject in this thread.
MOU's and LOI's are an invention of the airline purchase departments (and are used for PR reasons by the OEM PR departments) to lower the purchase price of you future aircraft order.
On top of that : The CMA GCM MOU is most probably (French) politically driven.

So your Statement that the MOU by an European company is politically driven ist a non-biased approach?

astuteman wrote:

Revelation wrote:

2175301 wrote:

There most certainly is: The A380 Amedeo "order" for 20 A380's.

Only years later did it become known that this was only a marketing option that if Amedeo found people willing to long term lease an A380 that Amedeo had an option to purchase up to 20 A380's for such leases.

Yep, stunt indeed. That Amedeo "order" stayed on the books for many years and was made to disappear into thin air at Airbus's convenience.

I'd like to think the current regime is better than the baloney castle era one, but this launch without orders and orders without signed contracts stuff makes me think they are not.

Airbus have launched programmes before without orders and are quite within their rights to do so.
They clearly had an Authority to Offer, as they have received responses.

Are you genuinely suggesting that the ALC LOI is a phantom in the same way that the Amedeo A380 order was - designed to give the illusion of propping up an entire programme that was at death's door?
Do you think that the A350F is sufficiently inadequate or ill-aimed to require that support (notwithstanding SUH giving it a pretty strong endorsement)
What do you really think the likelihood is of ALC not coming through with the firm order are?
Do they have a track record of doing so?

I certainly agree that it can take a long time to migrate from an MOU/LOI
From memory, the huge EK 777X order was "ordered" at the 2013 DAS, but did not appear in the Boeing order book until July 2014 according to the Boeing website.
It also took a long time for the last of the 737-10 MAX orders/conversions to finally hit the books
But they pretty much all did, eventually.
From my seat, this all looks like very ordinary normal business for a new derivative

Personally I think the A350F ticks a box that it's smaller sibling, the A330F didn't.
I think the A330F fell down the crack between the hugely demanded code D freighters like the 767 and A300, and the big code E freighters like the 777 and the 747. It is too much physical aircraft for what it lifts (which I think the 787 would also be, for the same reasons)
The A350F might be code E, but it lifts 100+ tonnes as opposed to the 60 odd of the A330F.
Solid product IMO, and a nice fit both for the dedicated freighter firms, and big airlines that already operate the A350

I'm going to make a prediction that Amedeo don't get to order any A350F's

Rgds

You see what the arc of the conversation was. The suggestion was that Airbus would not pull stunts, then it was pointed out where they had, and even more could have been produced if the whole BS castle dossier was revived.

I think the ALC LOI very well could be a quid-pro-quo for getting access to the A321s in exchange for manufacturing a sense of momentum for the A350F program. I'd be less dubious if they'd name who was taking the A350Fs.

I'm at a loss to understand why they feel the need to manufacture hype around the product. IMO there's no reason why they could not just wait till they have some orders of significance in hand till they started saying the product is launched.

Revelation wrote:

I'm at a loss to understand why they feel the need to manufacture hype around the product. IMO there's no reason why they could not just wait till they have some orders of significance in hand till they started saying the product is launched.

I really do not see any hype anywhere. I rode an uber yesterday and the uber driver did not mention A350F at all. There is no hype on the streets.

What if what they really want to do is to start the actual process of getting the plane to fly at year 2025 and they really do not care about how many customers they have at this time. To me that sounds like a very good reason. If that is what they want then waiting until they have customers is exactly what they do not want to do and so doing what they don't want to do would be silly.

Ertro wrote:

Revelation wrote:

I'm at a loss to understand why they feel the need to manufacture hype around the product. IMO there's no reason why they could not just wait till they have some orders of significance in hand till they started saying the product is launched.

I really do not see any hype anywhere. I rode an uber yesterday and the uber driver did not mention A350F at all. There is no hype on the streets.

What if what they really want to do is to start the actual process of getting the plane to fly at year 2025 and they really do not care about how many customers they have at this time.
To me that sounds like a very good reason.

If they wanted to hype it up, why did they make the announcement in a quarterly financial report to the stock market?

flee wrote:

Ertro wrote:

Revelation wrote:

I'm at a loss to understand why they feel the need to manufacture hype around the product. IMO there's no reason why they could not just wait till they have some orders of significance in hand till they started saying the product is launched.

I really do not see any hype anywhere. I rode an uber yesterday and the uber driver did not mention A350F at all. There is no hype on the streets.

What if what they really want to do is to start the actual process of getting the plane to fly at year 2025 and they really do not care about how many customers they have at this time.
To me that sounds like a very good reason.

If they wanted to hype it up, why did they make the announcement in a quarterly financial report to the stock market?

Quarterly report time, complete with executive interviews with outfits like Reuters and Bloomberg, is a perfect opportunity for hype.

Revelation wrote:

Quarterly report time, complete with executive interviews with outfits like Reuters and Bloomberg, is a perfect opportunity for hype.

No. Quarterly report is the least amount of hyping that is humanly possible to do taking into account that they have legal obligation to write about it as it has material impact on stock price and so not putting it into the report would land them in jail.

And who cares. What if they would have purchased full page ads in 1000 most prominent newspapers and all superbowl ad airtime slots. Would have been perfectly fine.

Revelation wrote:

You see what the arc of the conversation was. The suggestion was that Airbus would not pull stunts, then it was pointed out where they had, and even more could have been produced if the whole BS castle dossier was revived.

I think the ALC LOI very well could be a quid-pro-quo for getting access to the A321s in exchange for manufacturing a sense of momentum for the A350F program. I'd be less dubious if they'd name who was taking the A350Fs.

I'm at a loss to understand why they feel the need to manufacture hype around the product. IMO there's no reason why they could not just wait till they have some orders of significance in hand till they started saying the product is launched.

What more confusing to me and leave me more at a “loss” is why does any of this matter?

Seriously, why? For the moment the only competitor on the market is the 777F which in its current incarnation cannot be produced after 2028. So Airbus are making an alternative, which will meet regulatory standards post 2028.

This is an entirely new market segment for them, so yeah, perhaps it is worth them making some noise about in order to attract attention and possible orders. What’s wrong with that?

Is it a launch? is it just an authority to offer? is it a real order? or just an MOI. Who really cares? At this moment in time, it does indeed look like Airbus have a specification for the A350F which is attracting interest from the cargo industry. And if you or I were in a position to buy one I am sure we could call Airbus and order one. That’s the point. You can’t do that with the 77XF yet.

Revelation wrote:

Quarterly report time, complete with executive interviews with outfits like Reuters and Bloomberg, is a perfect opportunity for hype.

I think it is perfectly clear which new freighter derivative was hyped in recent months. And it wasn't the A350F.
- viewtopic.php?t=1461451
- viewtopic.php?t=1465579&p=22985525
- https://www.google.com/search?q=Boeing+ ... nt=gws-wiz

This "A350F hype" seems a bit history rewriting to "spread out" disappointment.

I hope Boeing can reach common ground with FAA and EASA on 777-9 certification and EIS late 2023/ early 2024. That would be a credible time to launch an 777-8F for development, testing, certification and service entry 5 years later. Towards the end of this decade.

I think the biggest A350F competitor this decade will be 77W converted freighters. 100t+ payload, good range and space, serveral conversion centers, good feed stock at attractive pricing. GE should come up with a solution for GE90-11x overhaul costst though.. That will lead to interesting discussions between lessors & split off GE Aviation..

keesje wrote:

Momo1435 wrote:

keesje wrote:

I don't think a big bang announcement for the A350F was either expected or promoted. That was for another freighter to be launched at Dubai. The downplaying of the A350F seems mostly intended to get the spotlights away from that dissapointment. And to mistify the fact one OE has the entrepreneurship and strenght to launch a new aircraft because they believe in it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=Boeing+ ... nt=gws-wiz

The talk about the number of orders for an A350F launch happened well before the Dubai Airshow was on people's minds.

The early publications about a possible launch did mention the 50 orders, which resulted in a whole discussion here on the forum which customer would order 50 at once. Which of course was nonsense as nobody even suggested that Airbus wanted 1 costumer for such a large order to launch. This was before Airbus confirmed the launch without announcing orders.

Before the airshow there were also publications that mentioned several possible customers, you even mentioned some these customers in this thread in the run up to the airshow. None of those potential customers did announce an order yet. The 2 orders that now have been announced are from customers that were never mentioned, so they were a surprise to many. But this has created room for speculations of course why they did not order yet.

You don't have to always mention Boeing (both what they did or not do) when you talk about the A350F launch, that's counterproductive in this discussion.

"you even mentioned some these customers in this thread in the run up to the airshow" That's the kind of mind playing we increasingly see. Yes I mentioned SQ and Korean as potential A350F customers. But to link it to me in one sentence with the Dubai Airshow is the kind of perception management we should try to stay away from IMO. Let's leave that to spindoctotors.

From their website and promotion materials it is clear Airbus is focussing it's sales efforts mostly on current A350 operators.


https://aircraft.airbus.com/en/aircraft/freighters/a350f#integrate

The type rating is actually a big problem for Airbus for the existing freight operators. It can help passenger operators with cargo divisions that share pilots or pilot training. For some big freight operators like FedEx, DHL, and Atlas there is no commonality with their existing fleets unlike a potential 777X. The 777X likely has a big potential advantage when it comes to pilot training due to the large worldwide 777 fleet of both passenger and freighter aircraft.

Revelation wrote:

astuteman wrote:

Revelation wrote:

Yep, stunt indeed. That Amedeo "order" stayed on the books for many years and was made to disappear into thin air at Airbus's convenience.

I'd like to think the current regime is better than the baloney castle era one, but this launch without orders and orders without signed contracts stuff makes me think they are not.

Airbus have launched programmes before without orders and are quite within their rights to do so.
They clearly had an Authority to Offer, as they have received responses.

Are you genuinely suggesting that the ALC LOI is a phantom in the same way that the Amedeo A380 order was - designed to give the illusion of propping up an entire programme that was at death's door?
Do you think that the A350F is sufficiently inadequate or ill-aimed to require that support (notwithstanding SUH giving it a pretty strong endorsement)
What do you really think the likelihood is of ALC not coming through with the firm order are?
Do they have a track record of doing so?

I certainly agree that it can take a long time to migrate from an MOU/LOI
From memory, the huge EK 777X order was "ordered" at the 2013 DAS, but did not appear in the Boeing order book until July 2014 according to the Boeing website.
It also took a long time for the last of the 737-10 MAX orders/conversions to finally hit the books
But they pretty much all did, eventually.
From my seat, this all looks like very ordinary normal business for a new derivative

Personally I think the A350F ticks a box that it's smaller sibling, the A330F didn't.
I think the A330F fell down the crack between the hugely demanded code D freighters like the 767 and A300, and the big code E freighters like the 777 and the 747. It is too much physical aircraft for what it lifts (which I think the 787 would also be, for the same reasons)
The A350F might be code E, but it lifts 100+ tonnes as opposed to the 60 odd of the A330F.
Solid product IMO, and a nice fit both for the dedicated freighter firms, and big airlines that already operate the A350

I'm going to make a prediction that Amedeo don't get to order any A350F's

Rgds

You see what the arc of the conversation was. The suggestion was that Airbus would not pull stunts, then it was pointed out where they had, and even more could have been produced if the whole BS castle dossier was revived.

I think the ALC LOI very well could be a quid-pro-quo for getting access to the A321s in exchange for manufacturing a sense of momentum for the A350F program. I'd be less dubious if they'd name who was taking the A350Fs.

I'm at a loss to understand why they feel the need to manufacture hype around the product. IMO there's no reason why they could not just wait till they have some orders of significance in hand till they started saying the product is launched.

And now you have lost me with all this "hype"

They launched the A350F and told us so in a financial document required by the regulators, and that nobody but shareholders or A-nuts is ever going to read - in no way can that be defined as "hype"

At the DAS they got some commitments in the form of LOI's or MOU's..
Here's what they said

https://www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pres ... ai-airshow

OK, the title reads .... "408 aircraft including the first A350F ordered at the Dubai airshow", but I'm sure I can dredge up loads of Airshow summaries that play a bit loose with the language. presumably to keep the titles brief and punchy.

Here's what the text of the article actually says...

The agreements covered the full range of commercial aircraft families, including a first commitment for the A350F freighter derivative.

And to emphasise the difference clearly in the text..

On the opening day of the show, Indigo Partners portfolio airlines placed a firm order for 255 A321neo Family aircraft, including 29 XLR

compare that to

The second day saw Air Lease Corporation sign a commitment for 111 aircraft covering the full range of aircraft families including the new A350 Freighter

Airbus are absolutely clear in their press releases about exactly what is going on. No hype of any sort.

From my seat, flying the "hype" kite just doesn't jive with the reality, which has been absolutely normal in pretty much every respect in my book.
Makes you wonder if Keesje is right that the real issue here is the "hype" around a 777XF launch at the DAS came to nothing...
Not that this tells us anything about how the market will evolve either.

Rgds

amdiesen wrote:

2175301 wrote:

zeke wrote:

ALC was not in isolation, it was for 25 A220-300s, 55 A321neos, 20 A321XLRs, 4 A330neos and 7 A350Fs.

I'm well aware of the numbers for the various models Zeke. In its own way it makes it a bit more suspicious.

I am quite sure that ALC can appropriately place 100 or so passenger airliners.

I'm scratching my head on which of those airlines would want an A350F, or which airlines would have approached ALC for possible rental of an A350F.

To me its quite plausible that the A350F was tossed into the LOI just so ALC could go out to airlines and quote a lease rate and see if they could find clients who would take them (similar to Amedeo - except its being called appropriately a LOI instead of an "order").

I have little doubt that ALC will sign an order for various passenger aircraft out of the LOI. The final numbers of each aircraft type may change, but It would be unusual for that part of the LOI to vanish. I'm very curious if there will actually be any A350F orders from this LOI. Time will tell.

If the LOI was based on Airliner interest, Asiana followed by Singapore would top the list. Asiana and Airbus negotiating moving deposits from passenger orders to freighters and then ALC assuming costs and delivering as a lease would solve the b744bdsf replacement need at a time when Korean/Asiana's cash constraints would otherwise inhibit freighter orders in the short-term.
Singapore's utility/need tilts 777XF, however, the a350f is an operational fit.

no way is it going to be Asiana cargo, there just going to try and last till the merger with Korean air cargo, and if that dosent sucseed then its liquidation time. However singapore seems like a good bet.

Why is there so much bickering here? Airbus "dares" to call it a launch (which IMHO it is), they even have the cheek to get an MOU... lol what are you all complaining about exactly? Think out of the box.

I believe it's good for the industry in general that Airbus has launched an alternative and whereas it will take more time, I'm sure it will be damn successful.

Gesendet von meinem SM-G781B mit Tapatalk

astuteman wrote:

Makes you wonder if Keesje is right that the real issue here is the "hype" around a 777XF launch at the DAS came to nothing...

Rgds

Only if you (and Keesje) ignore the criteria you yourself just set out in this post.

Can you show me where Boeing themselves said they were going to launch at DAS? Or any specific timeline?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but all Boeing have said is generic ‘we are continuing to talk to our customers’ and ‘looking at their requirements’ and ‘we’ll launch when we are ready.’

Just like the ‘hype’ around the A350F, the ‘hype’ around the 777XF potentially launching at DAS came from news reports on rumors. And, of course, AAB saying whatever he wants - but he was NEVER going to do anything at Dubai, I think we can all agree.

- Hamlet69

Hamlet69 wrote:

astuteman wrote:

Makes you wonder if Keesje is right that the real issue here is the "hype" around a 777XF launch at the DAS came to nothing...

Rgds

Only if you (and Keesje) ignore the criteria you yourself just set out in this post.

Can you show me where Boeing themselves said they were going to launch at DAS? Or any specific timeline?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but all Boeing have said is generic ‘we are continuing to talk to our customers’ and ‘looking at their requirements’ and ‘we’ll launch when we are ready.’

Just like the ‘hype’ around the A350F, the ‘hype’ around the 777XF potentially launching at DAS came from news reports on rumors. And, of course, AAB saying whatever he wants - but he was NEVER going to do anything at Dubai, I think we can all agree.

- Hamlet69

Completely agree Hamlet69. So why all the "hype" then, on here?
Please tell me

Rgds

astuteman wrote:

Hamlet69 wrote:

astuteman wrote:

Makes you wonder if Keesje is right that the real issue here is the "hype" around a 777XF launch at the DAS came to nothing...

Rgds

Only if you (and Keesje) ignore the criteria you yourself just set out in this post.

Can you show me where Boeing themselves said they were going to launch at DAS? Or any specific timeline?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but all Boeing have said is generic ‘we are continuing to talk to our customers’ and ‘looking at their requirements’ and ‘we’ll launch when we are ready.’

Just like the ‘hype’ around the A350F, the ‘hype’ around the 777XF potentially launching at DAS came from news reports on rumors. And, of course, AAB saying whatever he wants - but he was NEVER going to do anything at Dubai, I think we can all agree.

- Hamlet69

Completely agree Hamlet69. So why all the "hype" then, on here?
Please tell me

Rgds

No idea. Ok, that’s not true - SOME idea. . Posters on here have too much free time, and nothing else to talk about! Lol!

But no, I have no idea why the argument about what constitutes what. It’s all pretty clear if you know the industry. Likewise, no idea why there’s supposedly this big ‘disappointment’ about the XF.

Kindest regards,

Hamlet69

747classic wrote:

On top of that : The CMA GCM MOU is most probably (French) politically driven.

Would this be the same CMA CGMA that ordered two 777Fs less than three months ago?

The casual francophobia isn't particularly helpful...

2175301 wrote:

I'm scratching my head on which of those airlines would want an A350F, or which airlines would have approached ALC for possible rental of an A350F.

To me its quite plausible that the A350F was tossed into the LOI just so ALC could go out to airlines and quote a lease rate and see if they could find clients who would take them (similar to Amedeo - except its being called appropriately a LOI instead of an "order").

I have little doubt that ALC will sign an order for various passenger aircraft out of the LOI. The final numbers of each aircraft type may change, but It would be unusual for that part of the LOI to vanish. I'm very curious if there will actually be any A350F orders from this LOI. Time will tell.

This is what ALC said themselves https://airleasecorp.com/press/alc-orde ... ility-fund

“This new order announcement is the culmination of many months of hard work and dedication by both organizations to optimize and fine tune the size and scope of this large aircraft transaction in view of the rapidly growing global airline demand to modernize their jet fleets through the ALC leasing medium,” said Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, Executive Chairman of Air Lease Corporation. “After lengthy and detailed consultations with several dozen of our strategic airline customers around the world, we are focusing this comprehensive order on the most desirable and in demand aircraft types, covering the A220, A321neo, A330neo and A350 families. ALC is an international Market Leader in each of these categories of the most modern Airbus product lineup. These multi- year additions of new technology aircraft assets to ALC’s expanding portfolio will allow us to grow our revenues and profitability while satisfying our airline customer requirements.”

“ Udvar-Hazy added: "ALC was the launch customer for the very popular A321LR and XLR versions. Now, we become the launch lessor for the A350F and by far the largest lessor customer for the A220. We had the vision to be first adopters of the A321 and are convinced we have made the right choice again on the A220 and A350F, responding to what we see the market will need in the period of recovery ahead. In addition we are very enthusiastic to have inked a partnership for a sustainability fund which will contribute to the green future for our industry.”

“With this major order, we underscore our confidence not only in the strong future and growth of global commercial air transport, but in ALC’s business model, in our specific aircraft purchase decisions including, for the first time, the new A350 Freighter, and finally in our long term view that ordering new aircraft is an optimum investment of our shareholder capital,” said John L. Plueger, Air Lease Corporation CEO and President”

Looking through ALCs large customer base I see a couple of likely candidates that could take all 7 A350Fs.

zeke wrote:

2175301 wrote:

I'm scratching my head on which of those airlines would want an A350F, or which airlines would have approached ALC for possible rental of an A350F.

To me its quite plausible that the A350F was tossed into the LOI just so ALC could go out to airlines and quote a lease rate and see if they could find clients who would take them (similar to Amedeo - except its being called appropriately a LOI instead of an "order").

I have little doubt that ALC will sign an order for various passenger aircraft out of the LOI. The final numbers of each aircraft type may change, but It would be unusual for that part of the LOI to vanish. I'm very curious if there will actually be any A350F orders from this LOI. Time will tell.

This is what ALC said themselves https://airleasecorp.com/press/alc-orde ... ility-fund

“This new order announcement is the culmination of many months of hard work and dedication by both organizations to optimize and fine tune the size and scope of this large aircraft transaction in view of the rapidly growing global airline demand to modernize their jet fleets through the ALC leasing medium,” said Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, Executive Chairman of Air Lease Corporation. “After lengthy and detailed consultations with several dozen of our strategic airline customers around the world, we are focusing this comprehensive order on the most desirable and in demand aircraft types, covering the A220, A321neo, A330neo and A350 families. ALC is an international Market Leader in each of these categories of the most modern Airbus product lineup. These multi- year additions of new technology aircraft assets to ALC’s expanding portfolio will allow us to grow our revenues and profitability while satisfying our airline customer requirements.”

“ Udvar-Hazy added: "ALC was the launch customer for the very popular A321LR and XLR versions. Now, we become the launch lessor for the A350F and by far the largest lessor customer for the A220. We had the vision to be first adopters of the A321 and are convinced we have made the right choice again on the A220 and A350F, responding to what we see the market will need in the period of recovery ahead. In addition we are very enthusiastic to have inked a partnership for a sustainability fund which will contribute to the green future for our industry.”

“With this major order, we underscore our confidence not only in the strong future and growth of global commercial air transport, but in ALC’s business model, in our specific aircraft purchase decisions including, for the first time, the new A350 Freighter, and finally in our long term view that ordering new aircraft is an optimum investment of our shareholder capital,” said John L. Plueger, Air Lease Corporation CEO and President”

Looking through ALCs large customer base I see a couple of likely candidates that could take all 7 A350Fs.

Do you mind naming them out or sending a link (if possible) of their customer base

Cardude2 wrote:

Do you mind naming them out or sending a link (if possible) of their customer base

Sure here you go, you can use the controls to get either a map view or a list https://airleasecorp.com/customers

zeke wrote:

Looking through ALCs large customer base I see a couple of likely candidates that could take all 7 A350Fs.

Why don't you name what you see as the likely prospects for up to 7 A350F's

2175301 wrote:

Why don't you name what you see as the likely prospects for up to 7 A350F's

Because that is not what this thread is about, why don’t you start a new thread if you want to discuss LOIs, MOUs, and potential customers.

2175301 wrote:

zeke wrote:

Looking through ALCs large customer base I see a couple of likely candidates that could take all 7 A350Fs.

Why don't you name what you see as the likely prospects for up to 7 A350F's

Who says the 7 need to go to one customer? Looking at their customer base and also A350-operators I see potential customers in:

* Ethiopian Airlines (large A350 operator as well as B777F-operator. They are in the process of deciding on the B777X and A350-1000 and rumours are the A350 is the front-runner)
* China Eastern/Cargo Airlines (A350 operator as well as cargo-operator)
* Asiana/Korean Airlines (Asiana operates the A350, they could well be targeted as an A350F-customer after the planned merger)
* Emirates & Etihad (both A350-operators with dedicated freighters)
* Air France (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)
* Air China (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)
* Vietnam Airlines (A350-operators with plans to operate dedicated freighters)
* Cathay Pacific (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)

Of this list, I count Air China, Ethiopian and Vietnam as the most likely prospects. If Cathay was running a more normal operation, I would have added them as well. I can see those 7 easily be divided over these three airlines. 7 Is also quite a specific number, so I fully expect ALC to have customers lined-up for some of them.

It could also be, of course, that ALC will add (a) new customer(s) to its long list...

Cheers!

If for 777W operators it is simpler/more economic to operate the 777F then a 777X/777XF mix logically has the inside track for replacements when needed. But what if the lack of an A350F has been one (admittedly amongst many other more important) reason(s) for not selecting the A350? As pax configured fleets tend to be larger, perhaps the battle ground ahead will be for Airbus to secure more or consolidate existing A350-900/-1000 fleets, generating a modest number of A350F sales by default. If nothing else it levels the playing field.

LTEN11 wrote:

LifelinerOne wrote:

2175301 wrote:

Why don't you name what you see as the likely prospects for up to 7 A350F's

Who says the 7 need to go to one customer? Looking at their customer base and also A350-operators I see potential customers in:

* Ethiopian Airlines (large A350 operator as well as B777F-operator. They are in the process of deciding on the B777X and A350-1000 and rumours are the A350 is the front-runner)
* China Eastern/Cargo Airlines (A350 operator as well as cargo-operator)
* Asiana/Korean Airlines (Asiana operates the A350, they could well be targeted as an A350F-customer after the planned merger)
* Emirates & Etihad (both A350-operators with dedicated freighters)
* Air France (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)
* Air China (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)
* Vietnam Airlines (A350-operators with plans to operate dedicated freighters)
* Cathay Pacific (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)

Of this list, I count Air China, Ethiopian and Vietnam as the most likely prospects. If Cathay was running a more normal operation, I would have added them as well. I can see those 7 easily be divided over these three airlines. 7 Is also quite a specific number, so I fully expect ALC to have customers lined-up for some of them.

It could also be, of course, that ALC will add (a) new customer(s) to its long list...

Cheers!

So, lets go through that list:

* Ethiopian : Good candidate, though they do have a lot of 777F. Civil war may hinder growth, though a lot of their freight only services don't go through ADD.
* China Cargo/China Eastern : Another existing 777F operator, as well as 77W. Doubtful.
* Asiana/Korean : Another large 777F operator, not even positive that the existing 350's will remain in an integrated fleet. Not likely.
* Emirates : Another 777F operator, who has just ordered 2 more and has 77W's being converted. Don't operate the 350 yet by the way. Not likely.
* Etihad : Another 777F operator. Highly unlikely, they just aren't in a position to order anything extra. Only possibility would be if they converted some existing orders for 350-1000, don't think that involves ALC,
so no.
* Air France : Their cargo fleet consists of precisely 2 777F. As long as they operate their fleet of 77W's there is fleet commonality just as much as there would be with the 350's. Highly doubtful.
* Air China Cargo : Another large 777F operator who also operates 77W. Not likely.
* Vietnam Airlines : No current freighter fleet, current 350 operator, decent chance. Though I would have thought they would look for as much volume as possible, maybe even 2nd hand 748F's.
* Cathay Pacific : No, just not in a position to do anything at the moment. Maybe in the future the 350 freighter might have some appeal, but they've bypassed the 777F and stuck to the biggest in the past.

I'm surprised you didn't mention China Southern, but they're the same as MU and CA. If any of the chinese airlines order 350 freighter, it will be direct from Airbus.

I think the best possibility to sell A350F is to existing 777F operators,
especially so if they also operates A350 pax aircraft. The A350F is a 777F replacement. The last 777F will be delivered in 2027. If you rule out all airlines that currently operates the 777F, then there ain't many airlines left that could possibly be interested in the A350F.

If we go back in time and say to Boeing that it is unlikely that they could sell the 787 to airlines that operates the A330, there wouldn't be lots of sales. Most airlines operating the A330 didn't wait for the A330neo, they switched to the 787. The same might happen in the freighter market. Current 777F operators might choose the A350F instead of waiting for a potensial 777XF.

LTEN11 wrote:

So, lets go through that list:

* Ethiopian : Good candidate, though they do have a lot of 777F. Civil war may hinder growth, though a lot of their freight only services don't go through ADD.
* China Cargo/China Eastern : Another existing 777F operator, as well as 77W. Doubtful.
* Asiana/Korean : Another large 777F operator, not even positive that the existing 350's will remain in an integrated fleet. Not likely.
* Emirates : Another 777F operator, who has just ordered 2 more and has 77W's being converted. Don't operate the 350 yet by the way. Not likely.
* Etihad : Another 777F operator. Highly unlikely, they just aren't in a position to order anything extra. Only possibility would be if they converted some existing orders for 350-1000, don't think that involves ALC,
so no.
* Air France : Their cargo fleet consists of precisely 2 777F. As long as they operate their fleet of 77W's there is fleet commonality just as much as there would be with the 350's. Highly doubtful.
* Air China Cargo : Another large 777F operator who also operates 77W. Not likely.
* Vietnam Airlines : No current freighter fleet, current 350 operator, decent chance. Though I would have thought they would look for as much volume as possible, maybe even 2nd hand 748F's.
* Cathay Pacific : No, just not in a position to do anything at the moment. Maybe in the future the 350 freighter might have some appeal, but they've bypassed the 777F and stuck to the biggest in the past.

I'm surprised you didn't mention China Southern, but they're the same as MU and CA. If any of the chinese airlines order 350 freighter, it will be direct from Airbus.

Well, I'm not sure if the Chinese 3 will be ordering directly per se from Airbus. They have taken delivery of lots of leased Airbuses over the years from all major players. There's also a lot of politics involved with the Chinese. It wasn't like having the B787 and B777 prevented them from ordering A350s as well.

And, I was stating potential prospects here, not a definitive answer if they were going to order the A350F. Once again, it might still be that ALC will add a new customer to its portfolio, or we might be surprised by other A350-operators and/or ALC customers moving into the all-freight business. Let's see!

But my main point was actually that 7 is a very specific number. If you didn't have any customers in sight, you might have gone for a round number like 5. Unless we're talking about the conversion of some of their 8 A350-900s remaining on order..... Let's wait and see what's firmed-up in the coming weeks. Fairly sure it will be in the books in December 2021.

Cheers!

The Leeham article quoted Pluger:

ALC’s CEO and President John Pluger filled in: “The order for seven A350F corresponds to discussions with seven airline customers for placement of the freighters in 2026. We can’t confirm any placements yet as we haven’t had a contract for the aircraft, but discussions are active, and there is high interest from, for instance, existing A350 customers”.

Given ALC’s status I can’t see why we wouldn’t take at face value what they say: they haven’t yet contracted for the aircraft; there are currently seven airline customers they are talking to; and they see this as an “order”.

reidar76 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

LifelinerOne wrote:

Who says the 7 need to go to one customer? Looking at their customer base and also A350-operators I see potential customers in:

* Ethiopian Airlines (large A350 operator as well as B777F-operator. They are in the process of deciding on the B777X and A350-1000 and rumours are the A350 is the front-runner)
* China Eastern/Cargo Airlines (A350 operator as well as cargo-operator)
* Asiana/Korean Airlines (Asiana operates the A350, they could well be targeted as an A350F-customer after the planned merger)
* Emirates & Etihad (both A350-operators with dedicated freighters)
* Air France (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)
* Air China (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)
* Vietnam Airlines (A350-operators with plans to operate dedicated freighters)
* Cathay Pacific (A350-operator with dedicated freighters)

Of this list, I count Air China, Ethiopian and Vietnam as the most likely prospects. If Cathay was running a more normal operation, I would have added them as well. I can see those 7 easily be divided over these three airlines. 7 Is also quite a specific number, so I fully expect ALC to have customers lined-up for some of them.

It could also be, of course, that ALC will add (a) new customer(s) to its long list...

Cheers!

So, lets go through that list:

* Ethiopian : Good candidate, though they do have a lot of 777F. Civil war may hinder growth, though a lot of their freight only services don't go through ADD.
* China Cargo/China Eastern : Another existing 777F operator, as well as 77W. Doubtful.
* Asiana/Korean : Another large 777F operator, not even positive that the existing 350's will remain in an integrated fleet. Not likely.
* Emirates : Another 777F operator, who has just ordered 2 more and has 77W's being converted. Don't operate the 350 yet by the way. Not likely.
* Etihad : Another 777F operator. Highly unlikely, they just aren't in a position to order anything extra. Only possibility would be if they converted some existing orders for 350-1000, don't think that involves ALC,
so no.
* Air France : Their cargo fleet consists of precisely 2 777F. As long as they operate their fleet of 77W's there is fleet commonality just as much as there would be with the 350's. Highly doubtful.
* Air China Cargo : Another large 777F operator who also operates 77W. Not likely.
* Vietnam Airlines : No current freighter fleet, current 350 operator, decent chance. Though I would have thought they would look for as much volume as possible, maybe even 2nd hand 748F's.
* Cathay Pacific : No, just not in a position to do anything at the moment. Maybe in the future the 350 freighter might have some appeal, but they've bypassed the 777F and stuck to the biggest in the past.

I'm surprised you didn't mention China Southern, but they're the same as MU and CA. If any of the chinese airlines order 350 freighter, it will be direct from Airbus.

I think the best possibility to sell A350F is to existing 777F operators,
especially so if they also operates A350 pax aircraft. The A350F is a 777F replacement

And a 744F replacement for customers not needing the nose door.

best regards
Thomas

LTEN11 wrote:

reidar76 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

So, lets go through that list:

* Ethiopian : Good candidate, though they do have a lot of 777F. Civil war may hinder growth, though a lot of their freight only services don't go through ADD.
* China Cargo/China Eastern : Another existing 777F operator, as well as 77W. Doubtful.
* Asiana/Korean : Another large 777F operator, not even positive that the existing 350's will remain in an integrated fleet. Not likely.
* Emirates : Another 777F operator, who has just ordered 2 more and has 77W's being converted. Don't operate the 350 yet by the way. Not likely.
* Etihad : Another 777F operator. Highly unlikely, they just aren't in a position to order anything extra. Only possibility would be if they converted some existing orders for 350-1000, don't think that involves ALC,
so no.
* Air France : Their cargo fleet consists of precisely 2 777F. As long as they operate their fleet of 77W's there is fleet commonality just as much as there would be with the 350's. Highly doubtful.
* Air China Cargo : Another large 777F operator who also operates 77W. Not likely.
* Vietnam Airlines : No current freighter fleet, current 350 operator, decent chance. Though I would have thought they would look for as much volume as possible, maybe even 2nd hand 748F's.
* Cathay Pacific : No, just not in a position to do anything at the moment. Maybe in the future the 350 freighter might have some appeal, but they've bypassed the 777F and stuck to the biggest in the past.

I'm surprised you didn't mention China Southern, but they're the same as MU and CA. If any of the chinese airlines order 350 freighter, it will be direct from Airbus.

I think the best possibility to sell A350F is to existing 777F operators,
especially so if they also operates A350 pax aircraft. The A350F is a 777F replacement. The last 777F will be delivered in 2027. If you rule out all airlines that currently operates the 777F, then there ain't many airlines left that could possibly be interested in the A350F.

If we go back in time and say to Boeing that it is unlikely that they could sell the 787 to airlines that operates the A330, there wouldn't be lots of sales. Most airlines operating the A330 didn't wait for the A330neo, they switched to the 787. The same might happen in the freighter market. Current 777F operators might choose the A350F instead of waiting for a potensial 777XF.

Of course these 777F operators may order the 350F, but they have very little reason too at the moment. Boeing maybe able to sell another 100 in the next 5 years, they may sell none, but you can be sure that a new 777F will not cost anywhere near as much as a 350F, whenever they may become available. Let's remember there will be 777F's flying for another 20-30 years, it is a damn good freighter and will continue to be.

I think there is more chance to sell the 350F to existing 747F operators. If ALC have one customer for these 7 350F's, it's more likely to be a 747F operator than 777F one. Long term if the 350F sticks around, then sure it will be there as a 777F replacement, but by then the 77XF should be around as well.

According to that logic everybody would have kept buying A330ceo's after 787's introduction or ng's after introduction of MAX. Makes 0 sense...

tealnz wrote:

The Leeham article quoted Pluger:

ALC’s CEO and President John Pluger filled in: “The order for seven A350F corresponds to discussions with seven airline customers for placement of the freighters in 2026. We can’t confirm any placements yet as we haven’t had a contract for the aircraft, but discussions are active, and there is high interest from, for instance, existing A350 customers”.

Given ALC’s status I can’t see why we wouldn’t take at face value what they say: they haven’t yet contracted for the aircraft; there are currently seven airline customers they are talking to; and they see this as an “order”.

I agree but 7 customers sharing 7 frames = 1 each??

Yeah, one each doesn’t stack up. But being in discussions with seven customers comes across as just a statement of what they’re doing.

Normally the leased frames would supplement owned frames so I can’t see anything particularly strange about seven as an initial order.

LTEN11 wrote:

reidar76 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

So, lets go through that list:

* Ethiopian : Good candidate, though they do have a lot of 777F. Civil war may hinder growth, though a lot of their freight only services don't go through ADD.
* China Cargo/China Eastern : Another existing 777F operator, as well as 77W. Doubtful.
* Asiana/Korean : Another large 777F operator, not even positive that the existing 350's will remain in an integrated fleet. Not likely.
* Emirates : Another 777F operator, who has just ordered 2 more and has 77W's being converted. Don't operate the 350 yet by the way. Not likely.
* Etihad : Another 777F operator. Highly unlikely, they just aren't in a position to order anything extra. Only possibility would be if they converted some existing orders for 350-1000, don't think that involves ALC,
so no.
* Air France : Their cargo fleet consists of precisely 2 777F. As long as they operate their fleet of 77W's there is fleet commonality just as much as there would be with the 350's. Highly doubtful.
* Air China Cargo : Another large 777F operator who also operates 77W. Not likely.
* Vietnam Airlines : No current freighter fleet, current 350 operator, decent chance. Though I would have thought they would look for as much volume as possible, maybe even 2nd hand 748F's.
* Cathay Pacific : No, just not in a position to do anything at the moment. Maybe in the future the 350 freighter might have some appeal, but they've bypassed the 777F and stuck to the biggest in the past.

I'm surprised you didn't mention China Southern, but they're the same as MU and CA. If any of the chinese airlines order 350 freighter, it will be direct from Airbus.

I think the best possibility to sell A350F is to existing 777F operators,
especially so if they also operates A350 pax aircraft. The A350F is a 777F replacement. The last 777F will be delivered in 2027. If you rule out all airlines that currently operates the 777F, then there ain't many airlines left that could possibly be interested in the A350F.

If we go back in time and say to Boeing that it is unlikely that they could sell the 787 to airlines that operates the A330, there wouldn't be lots of sales. Most airlines operating the A330 didn't wait for the A330neo, they switched to the 787. The same might happen in the freighter market. Current 777F operators might choose the A350F instead of waiting for a potensial 777XF.

Of course these 777F operators may order the 350F, but they have very little reason too at the moment. Boeing maybe able to sell another 100 in the next 5 years, they may sell none, but you can be sure that a new 777F will not cost anywhere near as much as a 350F, whenever they may become available. Let's remember there will be 777F's flying for another 20-30 years, it is a damn good freighter and will continue to be.

I think there is more chance to sell the 350F to existing 747F operators. If ALC have one customer for these 7 350F's, it's more likely to be a 747F operator than 777F one. Long term if the 350F sticks around, then sure it will be there as a 777F replacement, but by then the 77XF should be around as well.

Existing 747F operators is good choice for the A350F sales team. Remember that the oldest 777F will be over 20 years old by the time the first A350F takes to the skies. I reckon the 777F will face environmental operating restrictions, both due to extreme noise from the GE90 engines and from the high fuel consumption. There is a reason last delivery will be in 2027.

Some airlines only leases their 777F, and there is a functioning used market for 777F. Lufthansa recently got ex-Emirates 777F, as an example. Airfrance 777F leases expires in the a favorable timeframe for the A350F etc. Yes, it's only two frames, but a good example for a possible A350F sale.

Extended singel pilot cruise and fellowfly for the A350 are both scheduled for 2025 certification. The 777F will have a shorter life than freighters traditionally have had, I think.

reidar76 wrote:

LTEN11 wrote:

reidar76 wrote:

I think the best possibility to sell A350F is to existing 777F operators,
especially so if they also operates A350 pax aircraft. The A350F is a 777F replacement. The last 777F will be delivered in 2027. If you rule out all airlines that currently operates the 777F, then there ain't many airlines left that could possibly be interested in the A350F.

If we go back in time and say to Boeing that it is unlikely that they could sell the 787 to airlines that operates the A330, there wouldn't be lots of sales. Most airlines operating the A330 didn't wait for the A330neo, they switched to the 787. The same might happen in the freighter market. Current 777F operators might choose the A350F instead of waiting for a potensial 777XF.

Of course these 777F operators may order the 350F, but they have very little reason too at the moment. Boeing maybe able to sell another 100 in the next 5 years, they may sell none, but you can be sure that a new 777F will not cost anywhere near as much as a 350F, whenever they may become available. Let's remember there will be 777F's flying for another 20-30 years, it is a damn good freighter and will continue to be.

I think there is more chance to sell the 350F to existing 747F operators. If ALC have one customer for these 7 350F's, it's more likely to be a 747F operator than 777F one. Long term if the 350F sticks around, then sure it will be there as a 777F replacement, but by then the 77XF should be around as well.

Existing 747F operators is good choice for the A350F sales team. Remember that the oldest 777F will be over 20 years old by the time the first A350F takes to the skies. I reckon the 777F will face environmental operating restrictions, both due to extreme noise from the GE90 engines and from the high fuel consumption. There is a reason last delivery will be in 2027.

Some airlines only leases their 777F, and there is a functioning used market for 777F. Lufthansa recently got ex-Emirates 777F, as an example. Airfrance 777F leases expires in the a favorable timeframe for the A350F etc. Yes, it's only two frames, but a good example for a possible A350F sale.

Extended singel pilot cruise and fellowfly for the A350 are both scheduled for 2025 certification. The 777F will have a shorter life than freighters traditionally have had, I think.

This is freight. Not passenger operations. Conversions are still MAJORITY of the market. What does that tell me? Advanced tech is nice but we just like cheap cheap cheap. 777F will be absolutely fine.