The ILA Berlin Air Show begins tomorrow. The Air Show is a poor cousin to the Farnborough Air Show (July this year) and the Paris Air Show (in odd-numbered years). We went to this show in 2006 and were more excited about returning to Berlin for the first time since before the Berlin Wall came down than we were about going to the event itself.
Boeing doesn’t place much stock in the show since it is viewed as an Airbus star vehicle. Best we can tell from the ILA website, Boeing isn’t even an exhibitor.
Airbus tries to have some major announcements for the show, although Farnborough and Paris–being the bigger draws and having greater international prestige–are clearly the favored forum.
What might Airbus announce at the Berlin show, other than a few orders? The aviation world is waiting and watching for what Airbus will do about the A330neo and, with it, the future of the A350-800. Airbus is sending the A350-900 to the Air Show for the first time–will this be the place Airbus puts the nail in the coffin of the A35-800? We have our doubts about that.
Could Airbus launch the A330neo at the ILA? We received an email over the weekend that an announcement could be forthcoming at this show, but the source is from outside Airbus (though information from this source is usually reliable). Expectations for the A330neo have centered on Farnborough, however. Our Market Intelligence tells us few potential customers have actually seen proposals from Airbus on the A330neo as yet, so we think it might be a bit premature to have a launch of the program. Information is also that Airbus has been looking at the “second half” of 2014 to make a decision (at least publicly). May isn’t in the second half–but July is.
Other than this suspense, if you can call it that, we don’t expect much out of ILA this week.
According to aviationweek.com, Rolls-Royce will exclusively power the A330neo with a Trent 1000-TEN derivative. A contract between Airbus and RR is expected to be signed by the end of May. Therefore, I doubt we will see an announcement at the ILA Berlin airshow.
Do you have a link to the AvWeek story?
Here you go – subscriber only:
it’s in the 19 may issue
They speak off a predeal already signed, and a deal to be done by month end (Norris and Flottau)
The article is now open for all readers…
Now it’s also here
The decision sounds reasonable. The Rolls-Royce Trent 1000-TEN leads to the RR Advanced engine. The Advanced engine is a Trent 1000-TEN with new engine core. So the Advanced may also fit on an A330NEO.
The Trent 1000-TEN, I believe, was commissioned for the 787-10, due to enter service in 2018, but the engine would have been available for the 787-8 and 787-9 from 2016. I wonder if the A330 re-engine will now get priority over the 787-8 and 787-9, with those programs being shifted behind the 787-10. It would be a way of getting the A330 engine to market quickly using existing resources.
A strategic victory for RR it seems. I had my carts on the GENX.
GE /GECAS had all reasons/ resources to defend market share / gain an additional GENX platform.
787 is and will remain a fighting market, 777x success is all but certain, 737 loses market share and is shared with Safran, A320 and A380 are half the half at best with PW making inroads. 748 GENX offers breakeven for GE, hopefully.
I see chances of GE aggressively offering a new A350 / 380 engine soon growing. Ending any gentlemens agreement with Boeing. It was a good deal but the situation has changed..
Looking back, taking everything into account, refusing to offer an A350 >80klbs engine proved a strategically shortsighted decision with serious colateral damage.
GE’s attitude to the neos are just shortsighted again. You can bet that they would have made more money out of a GEnx powered A330 and A380 than the 748i. If it’s about protecting their other investments in the 787 and 777X by not offering engines on competing frames, it becomes a moot point when you have RR stepping up to the plate to fight them anyways. Just what happened with the A350.
While Rolls Royce Germany is headquartered not far from the exhibition side.
Apart from that, ILA is becoming increasingly redundand. The presence by Airbus is reduced compared to previous years: no A380 flight display, again no A400M display on public days.
The best about the Berlin airshow is the city itself, which also stands out compared to Paris or London by way more affordable prices and generally being more fun.
I guess it was a political decision not to present the A400M to the public and remind German taxpayers that this aircraft is still not delivered. That aircraft on the tarmac of the still not finished new airport…
A380 flight display is located at Frankfurt. Less than 4 hours by train.
When in berlin- take the time to take a tour of the roof of the reichstag- a glass roof such that one can actually look down and see the pols at work – sort of a symbolic transparency thing. And if time suits, take in a concert by the Berlin Orchestra..
Historically the Paris air fair “Aerosalon” is the oldest as a sideline to the paris car fair in 1908.
The ILA takes its line of continuity from the “Internationale Luftschiffahrt-Ausstellung Frankfurt” 1909.
Farnborough has its roots in the RAF Airshow at Hendon from 1920 onwards.
“In addition, it is deep into development of the all-new GE9X for the Boeing 777X, for which there are more than 600 firm orders already”
Has the EK order been firmed?
Airbus is acting like they are worried about filling A330 production Slots – but I don’t think that’s the case. I think the A330 and it’s follow-on A330NEO have a lot of years of heavy sales and production to come – especially considering the fact that the 787 has been a bit expensive to produce (if ya’ know what I mean). I think the future belongs to the Airbus A330NEO.
While I don’t think an A330 NEO is going to sell like the A320 NEO, I agree that, despite the Boeing claims for the 787, it is far from time to sound the death knell.
The Airbus strategy for selling the remaining CEO slots could be very simple. You want some NEOs then you have to order some CEOs too (except you have already ordered some CEOs).
Airbus has been succesfully selling A330 along with A350 for over 8 years. some of the A330NEO enhancements will likely be transferred back onto the A330CEO too.
WSJ says the NEO costs about $2.7 Billion.
The NEO and the A350 were not available at that time. Slots for the A330 are now available at a time when the A350 will be delivered to the airlines.
$2.7 Billion for the NEO and how much will Rolls-Royce pay, $1 Billion? No matter who pays the price. For about 100 NEOs the price has to rise by about $30 million. Then an A330-200NEO would still be cheaper as an A350-800 but about the same price as a B787-9 (according to list prices).
I think Airbus can make the A330 NEO 15% more efficient then the CEO. That is convincing if you combine it with fleet / crew commonality, availability, maturity, reliability.
15% better than 787? Not a chance. We ran the numbers.
Scott, NEO over CEO , not 787.
On the 787 vs NEO; I have seen statements the 787 is 10-12% more fuel efficient then the A330 CEO today.
It seems Airbus will be able to improve fuel efficiency of the A330 NEo versus CEO by 15% (engines, weight, sharklets).
The 787 still has advantages over an A330 NEO. But the NEO has advantages over the 787 too. (’17-’20 availability, reputation, installed base, -F & MRTT variants, reliability, global MRO & crew infrastructure, 18 inch comfort in M,
I foresee a tough battle. The crowd assuming the 787 will always have the advantage because it is the 787, are up for a cold and rainy monday morning.
Ask e.g. DL, QF, AirAsia, UPS, Fedex, Air China, Turkish..
That would give the A330neo an edge over the 787. I think realistically, they may end up on par in terms of fuel efficiency. Which would still be impressive, as it would imply the A330neo being actually competitive with the 787 (as opposed to being an also-ran). Will be interesting to see if this does indeed turn out to be true.
Well, the 787 has the wider fuselage, so I wouldn’t be too sure about comfort. Reliability of the 787 is quite likely to increase, too – although in sales campaigns at least initially Airbus could play big on the reliability of the A330ceo as a benchmark the 787 initially falls short of, while Airbus can play the “we know how to do dispatch reliability on an A330” angle. Probably not something they’ll be able to do post 2016, though.
One area where I do expect the A330neo to have an advantage, though, is cost per frame – Airbus should be able to price it very competitively.
There’s no way the A330neo can be on par with or better than the 787 on fuel burn by just hanging its new engines and doing minor improvements. If that is true, Airbus could bury the 787 if they spent a little more to do the composite wings of the original A350 Mk1. But that doesn’t sound realistic.
From what I’ve read – I think on Aspire Aviation – the A330neo should be within 3% of the 787. So not very far at all from it, and 3% wouldn’t be an insurmountable difference, either.
Now – whether these numbers (or keesje’s 15% improvement of A330neo vs A330ceo) actually hold any water depends in large part on what exactly Airbus are going to do with the plane. Keep in mind that the neo is also going to be heavier than the A330ceo, which is going to eat up some of the efficiency gains of the engines; and the A330 is already heavier than its 787 counterpart to begin with; so you may well look at lower payload/range compared to the 787-8/-9 and A350. Which could be fine for some, but probably not for all – Hawaiian comes to mind, who allegedly reject the A330neo as having not enough range.
So overall – I think the A330neo makes sense and may end up giving the 787 a run for its money on some missions, but definitely not for all; bearing in mind that Airbus wouldn’t want it to be that, either, in order to not encroach on its own A350 line too much.
I think the balance will swing to the 787 when the -10 model comes out. It’s bigger than the A330 and 787-9, but it’s also more efficient. The A333 NEO will lack the payload/range of the 787-9, while matching it on efficiency; A333 NEO will lack the efficiency of the 787-10, while almost matching it on payload/range. You get the choice with the 787.
At that point, I think Airbus needs to bring out its A330 replacement – not the A350-800
While still worse than a B787. Yet attractive for dense cabins, medium range routes.
“Well, the 787 has the wider fuselage, so I wouldn’t be too sure about comfort.”
Yes, but they put in an extra set per row and narrow the seats & aisles.
“Probably not something they’ll be able to do post 2016,”
Why not? Airbus has 3-4 years to replace e.g. the A330s top 20 most flight delaying systems/ components, based on statistics from a 1000 ac strong fleet./ 20 years
I think we will see a string of A330 NEO enhancement announcement after launch. Cabin options, systems, cockpit, etc. Also e.g. Sharklets, new interiors for A330 CEO’s to enhance the overall fleet value / standardisation. Just like on the A320 CEO.