Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Dreamliner Niche

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Dreamliner Niche

    Reading an article about the rollout of the first of a Dreamliner model, I started to wonder if it is meant to compete against any specific model from another manufacturer. Or to just sell in its own niche.

  • #2
    Originally posted by EconomyClass View Post
    Reading an article about the rollout of the first of a Dreamliner model, I started to wonder if it is meant to compete against any specific model from another manufacturer. Or to just sell in its own niche.
    Aircraft companies usually start a new new project once the break even point has been reached on theprevious project (i.e. the development costs have been returned; around 300 aircraft or so).

    In Boeing's case the competition was the A380. Surprising???? Boeing passenger studies did not reveal a market for a A380 sized aircraft and picked one that would match more point to point routes that carry fewer passengers (perhaps such as Denver to Tokyo). It appears that Boeing was right on this one since the 787 has outsold A380 by a factor of two or three to date. Upcoming competition for the 787 will likely be the A380.

    Comment


    • #3
      I think the 787 is more of a response to the A330. Not only are they very similar purpose-wise, but think about all the airlines with ageing 767s , which would have had to be replaced one day. No, they weren't going to pick the A380, they were definitely going to get the A330 if the 787 didn't exist. I'm not at all convinced the 787 can be compared to the A380 in any way. I would say the A380 is part 744 replacement and part its own niche (superjumbo).

      Comment


      • #4
        Is B747 Superjumbo?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by EconomyClass View Post
          Is B747 Superjumbo?
          A380 figures....
          Seating capacity
          525 (3-class)
          644 (2-class)
          853 (1-class)

          B747-400D figures....
          Seating capacity
          416 (3-class)
          524 (2-class)
          660 (400D, 1-class)

          OK, so the 747 carries around 200 less pax than the 380 but personally speaking, I class anything that crams me in with 659 other people as a super jumbo.

          I believe that El Al once set a record by carrying over 1,000 pax on a humanitarian flight using a 747-300. Passengers were crouched in the aisles and the aircraft landed with 2 more pax than it took off with due to the birth of 2 babies inflight.
          The thought of that flight makes Ryanair seem positively spacious !!

          Edit: the El Al flight was apparently B747-200 4X-AXD. It carried 1087 pax in a seats stripped out configuration to remove Ethiopian Jews from that country where they were under threat. Imagine the queue for the toilets ?!
          Last edited by brianw999; 2013-08-26, 10:01.
          If it 'ain't broken........ Don't try to mend it !

          Comment


          • #6
            Let's clarify on one topic - Boeing and Airbus are competitors and often compete in the same ranges quite closely, however the 787 versus A380 competition is more so a competing theory/focus than it is meant to compete directly.

            There are two theories at play here, and both with valid points;
            1). Very large aircraft are meant to fill already restricted city pairs where capacity increase is needed, but a frequency increase would be either too expensive, or at times, nearly impossible. (LHR, JFK, LAX, et al).
            2). Very efficient aircraft would be needed to handle new and (what would have been previously considered unprofitable) perhaps less sought after routes. It would airlines to clean out their 757, 767, and lower end (capacity wise) and older 777s, not to mention tackle the A330 and in some ways the A340 family. It was a great bet, because here - you would be more efficient than a competitor's product, and provide a replacement of your own line.

            I.E. Both do not do the same, and were not meant to. Both, however operate within the same economies. Had the economy improved, both would have done well, but the 787 (I believe) would have done better due to the fact that more airlines would be willing to try new/adventurous routes, thus needing new aircraft. But, in this horrible economy, the A380 has been doing quite well with the airlines that it is used by, because it allowed them to add capacity to large cities, and in many ways (for those that used 747s), add an entire cabin to the aircraft that could carry premium passengers - at a lower cost than their previous aircraft.

            As for a 787 niche - yes, it does have one (for now). A great example that I have come across is Norwegian Air Shuttle's expansion into FLL - CPH, OSL, and ARN, all by December 1st. As the economy improves (or at least, changes to meet the nations that are better suited to emerge from this thing first), we are going to see more 'adventurous' routes pop up. I can't wait to see what Air India has planned, because for them - it may very well help them expand service cities like BOM, HYD, GOI, AMD, BLR, IXE, CCJ, ATQ, JAI, MAA, and CCU, opening these cities to pairs like LHR, MAN, SIN, KUL, HKG, BKK and others.

            While the A380 has not done as well as the 787, it is for a very different reason. I think that Airbus did not expect (but would have been quite content with) massive orders. The A380's ability to add greater space (and if EK has their way) extra amenities, makes the aircraft a favorite with passenger, and airlines alike. The A380s will ultimately prove indispensable to the airlines that use them, however it's sheer size is restrictive at times. The 787 is great - but not a great aircraft to use on premium routes, as it's size is also restrictive. Ultimatley both have their strengths, and wise airlines are going to find a way to use them both, to their capacities.
            Whatever is necessary, is never unwise.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
              ................ Upcoming competition for the 787 will likely be the A380.
              Oooops; I meant to type A350.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
                Aircraft companies usually start a new new project once the break even point has been reached on theprevious project (i.e. the development costs have been returned; around 300 aircraft or so).

                In Boeing's case the competition was the A380. Surprising???? Boeing passenger studies did not reveal a market for a A380 sized aircraft and picked one that would match more point to point routes that carry fewer passengers (perhaps such as Denver to Tokyo). It appears that Boeing was right on this one since the 787 has outsold A380 by a factor of two or three to date. Upcoming competition for the 787 will likely be the A380.
                Uhhhh... No disrespect, but I don't see how the 787 and A380 can be compared. Wouldn't that be like trying to compare apples and oranges?

                Rick G.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Highkeas View Post
                  Oooops; I meant to type A350.
                  Oops, sorry highkeas. I didn't read to the bottom of the thread here before replying to your A380 typo.

                  oi.... sorry everyone. lol...

                  Rick G.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Rick G View Post
                    Uhhhh... No disrespect, but I don't see how the 787 and A380 can be compared. Wouldn't that be like trying to compare apples and oranges?

                    Rick G.
                    I agree the aircraft are not comparable. What I meant was the two aircraft makers were in competition to develop their next comercial aircraft.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Anybody remember when there was talk about "seats" where passengers would sit like riding a horse so they could be jammed more closely? And then standing fares? I assume maybe the FAA put a kibosh on such ideas.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X