Airbus’ McArtor on VLA, 777X, 757 replacement and Airbus future products

Airbus Americas Chairman Allan McArtor.

Allan McArtor believes there will always be a market for the Very Large Aircraft (VLA), but he’s not surprised Boeing cut the production rate of the 747-8.

McArtor, who as chairman of Airbus Americas, is hardly an unbiased observer. He says the 747-8 Intercontinental is uneconomic and the market for the 747-8F is weak. But he also acknowledged that the dearth of sales for the Airbus A380 has been a challenge.

Airbus has forecast 1,200-1,300 VLA-Passenger deliveries over a 20 year period every year since 2000, while Boeing has steadily reduced its forecast to just 540 VLAPs in its current forecast. Airbus believes it will capture 50% of the market, based on its forecast. In fact, it currently is capturing between 86%-90% of the sales.

Each forecasts several hundred more VLA-Freighter deliveries during the next 20 years. Boeing currently holds a monopoly in the VLAF sector, but sales haven’t been on a pace to meet either company’s forecast, nor have sales of the A380 remotely maintained a pace that suggests Airbus will meet its own forecast, without dramatically adjusting both the total market and its market share expectations.

In an interview with Leeham News, McArtor maintained there will “always” be a demand for the VLA. He acknowledged that one can quibble with the forecast or the timing, but airport constraints and growing markets between key cities, such as London-Tokyo, London-New York, Paris-Tokyo or New York and similar segments, will demand a VLAP.

Airbus so far this year has has a net order for the A380 of minus three, but it signed a Memorandum of Understanding for 20 from specialty lessor Doric during the Paris Air Show. This is expected to be firmed up before the end of the year, potentially at the Dubai Air Show.

Boeing is also expected to make a splash at Dubai with the highly anticipated public launch of the 777X, with a large order from Emirates Airlines. The airplane, with a new composite wing, new engines, systems upgrades and cabin modifications, will come in a 350-seat 777-8 and a 407-seat 777-9. The 777-8 directly competes with the Airbus A350-1000. The 777-9 doesn’t have an Airbus competitor and at nominally 407 seats falls just within the VLA sector, which begins at 400 seats.

At the ISTAT conference in Barcelona this month, Airbus’ John Leahy, COO-Customers, said the company is studying a possible stretch of the A350-1000 that would presumably be a competitor to the 777-9, but then he backtracked a bit, telling reporters “there is no story here.”

McArtor provided a little clarity in our interview.

“We look at a lot of hypotheticals all the time,” he said. “Do we have a program to do that? No. Do we have a[n internal] proposal to do that? No. We’re pretty comfortable with the family of airplanes we have.”

Many, including this column, believe the 777-9 will kill off the somewhat larger 747-8I and adversely impact the A380. McArtor somewhat sidestepped this question, saying, “The A350-1000 would impact the A380 if any would.”

“If I had my druthers, we’d stretch the A380,” McArtor told us. “It’s begging to be stretched.”

As for the prospect of a Boeing 757 replacement that would also mean replacing the Boeing 737-900ER/9 MAX and A321ceo/neo, McArtor doesn’t think a similarly sized replacement may make sense. Continued up-gauging trends may suggest the 757 replacement might well be a larger aircraft that falls to the A330-200 250-seater, he says.

Of course, this brings the market to the Boeing 787-8, but this plane has a range of 8,000nm vs the 4,000sm of the 757; and potentially an A330-200 Lite, a lighter gross weight/reduced thrust, shorter-range version of today’s A330-200 which has a range of 7,200nm. Some would suggest neither airplane is optimized to be a true 757 replacement, just as neither are the 737-900ER/9 nor the A321ceo/neo.

Also, by 2025, when a 757 replacement is envisioned, the A330-200 will be 30 years old, a design from the late 1980s/early 1990s, with an EIS of 1994.

“I think we can make incremental improvements to the A330 and probably keep the program going: a new engine, winglets, avionics,” McArtor said. “Personally I don’t think Boeing is ready to commit to a 757 replacement. I think they’d use the lower-end 787.”

36 Comments on “Airbus’ McArtor on VLA, 777X, 757 replacement and Airbus future products

  1. “The 777-9 doesn’t have an Airbus competitor and at nominally 407 seats falls just within the VLA sector, which begins at 400 seats.”

    Many 777-300ER and even A333’s falls within the VLA sector if we look at leisurely selected seatcounts only. I think the 777X is not a new VLA but a 2.7m / 2 rows 777-300ER stretch.

    http://www.seatmaestro.com/airplanes-seat-maps/air-france-boeing-b777-300-indian-caribbean-ocean.html

    It isn´t that much longer the a A350-1000 iether, less then 3m ! Boeing may say the 777-9X currently has no competition. A lot of hope in there I guess.

      • KVT, the A350-1000. Ask JAL.

        It´s just only 2-3 economy class rows/ 1 business class row shorter then the 777-9X and seems way lighter and more efficient.

        Airlines like CX, BA, JAL, SQ won´t do 10 abreast on a 777X. Others (AF, EK, AA) already have 10 abreast so neither will change the number of seats per row.

        I think it totally amazing has some try to keep standing the 777-9X will eat into (50% larger) A380 sales and at the same time argue the 777-9X has no competition from the (7% smaller) A350-1000. 777-9X 407 seats.. let it go. Live is full of surprises if you think like that.

      • The 777-9X has the advantage over the A350-1000 in terms of the load it can carry, ie more freight. The A350-1000 has almost as many seats as the 777-9X in many actual configurations, particularly premium-heavy configurations. The 777 is wider than ideal for premium seats: you either choose four across, access to the aisle, where you waste the width of the plane, or go for a sub-optimal arrangement where passengers have to climb over others to get to the bathroom. On transcontinental routes typically half the plane is given over to business class seats, so this is a big deal. The A350 is also more efficient per passenger carried.

        The planes compete but they are not the same

    • The opposite is also true: except for a niche ULH airplane (777-8), Boeing won’t have anything proper to offer against the A350-1000. In the long-run 350-400 seat market, I expect Airbus to capture 45% of the pie, and Boeing 55% (50% for the 777-9, 5% for the 777-8).

      • I wouldn’t have predicted 55% for the A350 Mk. I (i.e. warmed-over A330) against the 787, and I can’t see how the 777X would achieve that with what is exactly the same approach the A350 Mk. I used against a newly developed plane.

      • @anfromme

        There is a difference. The A350 MKI and 787 would have had the same engine technology while the 777X will profit from newer generation engines (GE claims 4-5% better SFC than Trent XWB). The 777X airframe will of course be heavier and the newer engine will have to compensate for it. Additionally, Boeing stretched the 779 just far enough so it can equal the fuel burn per passenger of the A350-1000. The A350 MKI and 787 would have been similar sized airplanes.

      • There is a difference. The A350 MKI and 787 would have had the same engine technology while the 777X will profit from newer generation engines (GE claims 4-5% better SFC than Trent XWB).

        You have a point there – but I don’t see that making that much of a difference, and I’d be curious to see the actual SFC difference, given that every manufacturer is going to claim their product is the better one. And the XWB is of course going to get PIPs as well, so Trent XWB today isn’t going to be Trent XWB 2020.
        The GE9X is going to be one step further from the 787’s GEnx, still a derivative of the GE90.
        So it’s going to be as far removed from the GEnx and GE90 as the Trent XWB already is from the Trent 1000 and Trent 800, respectively.

        The 777X airframe will of course be heavier and the newer engine will have to compensate for it. Additionally, Boeing stretched the 779 just far enough so it can equal the fuel burn per passenger of the A350-1000. The A350 MKI and 787 would have been similar sized airplanes.

        The latter is actually a good point – Airbus tried to match the 787 1:1 initially, which probably wasn’t a good idea given they were going to build a derivative. Boeing definitely learned a lesson from that and placed the 777-8 just above the A350-900 and the -9 just above the -1000.

        Having said all that, I still don’t see the 777X capturing 55% against the A350. If that worked, it would have followed that Airbus should have just upgauged the A350 Mk. I, get a new engine (basically what is now the Trent XWB) developed and – presto – capture 55% of the market against the 787. That doesn’t sound realistic, to be honest.

    • I agree. Only the ME carriers are going to buy the 777-8X for it’s range. I think alot of airlines will be willing to downgauge a little bit to the A350-1000 due to the economics. Boeing really needs a clean-sheet 777 replacement with a true 10 abreast fuselage. One model competing directly with the A350-1000 and a second in the 400+ seat range just like the 777x. Not totally necessary to have an A350-900 competitor as the 787-10 will get some of that market and many of the 777-200 replacement decisions have already been made anyways.

  2. Delighted to see that Leeham is a door flag of Airbus.

    As all the flag-bearer of the world for Airbus and/or Boeing, the analyzes cannot be objectives …

    Who may still believe that Airbus will sell 1400 A380 in twenty years since he sold less than 300 in 13 years. We must not forget that since 2000 Airbus has evaluate yet to 1400 VLA for 2000-2020 ca mean that Airbus must still sell something like 1100 VLA in 7 years until 2020!!

    Not a lot of time.

    The 747-8F will have a future in the freight, then the 777-9X probably will be for the passengers.

    The objective question is that,

    will be t it possible that the 777-9X (big twin engines) killed the A380-800 (big four engines ??

    • Who may still believe that Airbus will sell 1400 A380 in twenty years since he sold less than 300 in 13 years. We must not forget that since 2000 Airbus has evaluate yet to 1400 VLA for 2000-2020 ca mean that Airbus must still sell something like 1100 VLA in 7 years until 2020!!

      1400 is their total prediction in the VLA market. They only ever stated that they’d capture ~50% of that market (i.e. ~700 planes), as Scott already mentioned in his article.
      Also, Airbus have adjusted their market forecast. They didn’t change the quantity (which was always around ~1400 for VLAs over a twenty-year period), but they did change the forecast period. A lot of what they forecast in 2000 for the period between 2000 and 2015 obviously didn’t materialise.
      However, their latest market forecast goes into the year 2032. They currently expect 1330 VLA (not just A380!) deliveries between now and 2032, not between now and 2020.

      Whether or not that’s achievable is debatable, but let’s at least debate about the correct numbers and timeframe.

      If you want to, you can dig into their forecast here:
      http://www.airbus.com/company/market/forecast/

      • Whether or not that’s achievable is debatable, but let’s at least debate about the correct numbers and timeframe.

        Let me clarify my phrasing:
        Whether or not that’s achievable is debatable, but let’s at least debate based on the correct numbers and timeframe.

  3. To complement my post, I forgot to say that if Airbus does not want to start the A350-110 it is for the reason which is that it will cannibalise the A380-800, then the kill.

    The side of Boeing I am afraid they have cede the APG 300-350 seats in favor of Airbus.

    I thinkest that Boeing must launch the 797 with the same engines as the forthcoming 777-9X.

    797-800X

    330 seats, 40 LD3 containers, 15,200 km for a design range winner, great demand by the market. (Success of the 773ER, A359)

    797-800ERX /ERXF (freighter)

    Same capacity that the -800X but for a range design that meets the needs of Emirates. More high gross weight for this design range of 16000-17000 km

    797-900 ERX

    Same MTOW that the -800ERX for having a design range winner of 15,000 km. This streched aboutthis siêges 368 with a volume of freight as something like 48 LD3.

    Of course this choice belongs to Boeing.

    But if Boeing does not, we will see the A350-900 take the market whose Boeing is the absent. A prosperity of the A350-900 as an A330 act 2, who will be pleased to doors flag of the world for a long time …

    Life will be beautiful for the Airbus cheer leader.!

    Thank you!

    • Whether or not that’s achievable is debatable, but let’s at least debate about the correct numbers and timeframe.

      You basically suggest a new aircraft family that cannibalises the just-announced 787-10, 778X and 779X in equal measure.
      I dare say that’s a non-starter.

      • Yup. 777-200 replacement market has already sailed to a large extent with 787-9 and A350-900 (not to mention the 787-10). Don’t see the point in down-scaling a 777 replacement to that size. Start it at 350 seats and move up just like they are doing with the 777X but with a clean-sheet design.

  4. “…make incremental improvements to the A330 and probably keep the program going: a new engine, winglets, avionics,”

    Er, does that hint at the much discussed/denied A330neo?

    • An 50 meter long A330-100 with max 320 passengers and a shortened wing?
      An A350-1100 with “no story here”? Why not a nearly 60 meter long A323? …
      Is Airbus trying to distract Boeing?

  5. It will be interesting to see what engines are or will be on offer for an A330 NEO or A330 replacement. P+W have been nearly pushed out of the wide body business. I can’t help wondering how long until they will be ready to develop and offer a new GTF engine range for WBs? Could an A330 replacement engine core, starting at 60,000lbs, as I guess Airbus will aim at medium range, (the B787 already has the long range market cornered) end up covering A380 and future A350s as well, reaching say 95,000lbs?

    • ref. Airbus’s c,2022 787 competitor: I really can’t see them producing both a clean-sheet design AND a A330neo derivative (for the 757 mkt).

      And if they were to stick with just the A330neo as the solution, could it really be competitive in anything but the very short term (ie. due to having latest engine tech)?

      IMO the A330neo is not going to happen…

      • My thoughts, too.
        Why should Airbus use the old fuselage for a new aircraft? Airbus and Boeing both would need a wing for an aircraft with about 300 seats (max. single class).
        For Airbus this could be an A323 with a length of about 60 meters or an A350-600 with less than 50 m, an A310 with a new barrel.

      • IMO the A330neo time window has passed. By the time it can enter the market, a new 787 or A350 will be available within 3 years.

      • I agree, any new medium ranged WB should preferably use the A350 barrel, or an all new one with a smaller cross-section. The A300/A330 barrel is legacy constrained. It has worked perfectly on the A330 — and on the A300, A310 and A340 for that matter — but the A330 entered into service some 20 years ago. Time to move on.

  6. Sorry Checklist,
    I believe Leeham is easily the most objective blog available.
    If there appears to be bias, perhaps our friends in Chicago have earned the criticism you appear to believe is being levelled at them.
    The stock market performance is exemplary for the moment, but when a new CEO takes the helm, he will inherit the huge 787 cost deferments the extraordinary 748 shambles plus a few other skeletons in the cupboard.

    • Hi Andrew,

      It scantily that the question about 1400 VLA’s in the period of frame 2000-2020 focused embrace you …

      It will be no different in 20 years.

      As regards our friends in Chicago, they were still likely to sell of the 747-8 Freighter thinest it has no equivalent and the chance will turn in favor of the one here …

  7. Let’s be optimistic here for both A and B:

    A: the 320 neo is a tunaway success and sells to cpacity until 2025 when a new model is launched…NSA 757 replacement craft
    : the 330 sells and produces into the 2020 range, then becomes a more niche plane ala 767

    : the 350 launches and urampup goes well and a third line is addedsmoothly so that by 2020 A is producing around 150 350 models a year
    : the 380 somehow finds some momentum and produces at 30-40 a year

    FOr B:
    the MAX ramps up to 52 aircrat a year
    : the 787 rampsup to 14-16 a month
    the 777 stays at 100 a year until 2020 and then ramps down as the 777-9x ramps up
    : the 767 is a niche aircraft and tankers are ordered
    : the 747-8 plops along at 12-18 a year

  8. “I believe Leeham is easily the most objective blog available.
    Agreed. Scott seems to do slaps and compliments in all diections.

    On the A330 NEO that has been considered since 2000 (GP7000), we can see the A330 has done well. Everybody lost track of total orders, I seem to remember 800 since the technological superior (?) 787 was launched.

    I guess regardless of the competition, Airbus account managers ask the owners of the 1000 A330s, what they think of the A330 that carries more payload with 15% less fuel consumption, an upgraded cockpit (HUD) and what other enhancements they would like. Retaining lots of commonality, reliability, engine choice and a significant lower price then a 787/A350. W’ll see..

    • But just think of the problems for Boeing if Airbus do bring out a clean sheet design in the 787 space in 2022. The 10yr old 787 will be left having to be upgraded but with an older basic design.

      It’s potentially a scenario for Airbus domination from 150 to 350 seats, and if they stretch the A350-1000 (and A321?), maybe across the board? They could have the resources to do all of these IMO if they drop the A350-800 and A380 stretch.

  9. I would rather go for an A350 with new, smaller (i.e. optimized) wing than for a re-engined A330. It also harvests the new and possibly more efficient production process of the A350.

  10. Pingback: A350 program update: EIS date set (sort of); ambiguity over -800; talk of a -1000 stretch | Leeham News and Comment

  11. So if the 777-9 ends up having more orders than the A350-1000 after the upcoming airshow, will that mean the 777-9 is a better a/c?

    • I’m guessing about 150 orders from four customers. Should be a good horse race for a few years.

  12. A re-engined A330 could happen with a new wingspan of less than 52 m / 171′. That depends on how Airbus and suppliers can ramp up production for the A350. Can they produce enough barrels for both wings than I would expect no new engine for A330.

    I would not role out the option one engine supplier pays for an A330-NEO without any further changes to the fuselage or wing..

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *