Go to curiositystream.thld.co/coby_0322 and use the code COBY to save 25% off today, that's only $14.99 a year. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today's video.
Coby... You are such a handsome stud- muffin😉😋🤤! . I really enjoyed this episode. Imo, I think Airbus is completely in the wrong by denying the severity of the paint defect on their A350's, and if they do this to Qatar, they have to do it to all the other carriers who purchased the same aircraft type. Personally, I strongly believe the integrity of the composite material is seriously compromised by ignoring or trying to downplay the problem and saying that it's just cosmetic. I hope Qatar sues Airbus to either redo the livery paint, or buy back their own aircraft at near full price ✈️.
I think it would be really stupid for Qatar to do that. Boeing will have control over Qatar with no fear of losing it as a customer and with the recent history of Boeing that will be the worst strategic decision. We are just witnessing German realizing it puts its energy security to Russia and guess what happened, he acted without fear. Qatar should resolve this issue with Airbus, but my question is why are other airlines not suing Airbus too?
You're missing an important point that Qatar Airlines is widely known for being the most difficult and picky customer. They've spend the last 10 years busy burning any relationship they had with Airbus, and they've been doing the same with Boeing too. Airbus has evidently had enough, and Boeing won't come to their rescue either. IF there is some sort of A350/B777X swap deal, it will be on favourable Boeing terms only.
And there are two more issues to mention: 1. The 777X still isn't flying. And if it is flying someday, there are other customers who have to be serve first. 2. The 737 MAX is simply unconscionable for Qatars customers. It is a plane only for low budget traffic and has still the taint of the horror crashes years ago.
This video is ridiculous. Boeing would spend billions on buying those 53 A350, only to get the most difficult client in the industry to fight with them about the numerous problems of their own aircraft.
Agreed. This idea is not only infeasible but the return on investment here would be uncertain and really 53 jets…. You’d hope to ever come close to that on sales. So break even maybe?
Correction: Airbus offered Qatar and other customers to repaint the airplanes under warranty, free of charge. Qatar wanted an explanation why the paint was peeling and did not accept the explanation Airbus offered, as they did not believe this was the "root cause" of the problem. They demanded Airbus investigate further, which Airbus did not, or to what we know, did not in a way that was to satisfy Qatar. Then the disputes escalated.
After the first round of touch up in... I forget, NL? or something.. it's been determined that the cause is due to the conductive metal mesh layer over parts of the air craft. They've cleared that its cosmetic only and will work on a solution. airbus believes that Qatar airways had their gov suspend the planes as an out to receive subsidies from its own gov during well.. now. However, Qatar Air complaining about the aesthetics of the planes isnt new. They've always been picky upon delivery. so.. you're the judge of this situation
From what I've heard, as there are multiple airlines reporting paint issues, Airbus has offered them complimentary repaints as a temporary fix whilst they determine the root cause. Aside from Qatar all airlines accepted this. Apparently the aircraft Qatar filmed was due a scheduled repaint anyway and had been sitting outside unprotected for months due to a lack of demand. So the paint issues were made to look far worse than they'd otherwise be.
@@mikeblatzheim2797 i think they figured it out that it was the lighting meatl mesh under the paint, there where offered repaints but the issue would obviously still be there and the a total fix would take several years or maybe never, because the new planes come with a different one so Airbus is not as heavily invested.
2:27 Afaik, Airbus does do the fix, free of charge (As for every other airline). The real issue is that they are not willing to pay a compensation for the grounding, that is kinda dubious, since the quatari authorities (who have close ties to Quatar Airlines) are the only ones who grounded the jet. I know, the difference sounds minor, but makes a huge difference morally (and in court).
Since Qatar is having fewer passengers due to the pandemic most of the aircraft in question have been sitting on the ground for months anyways. So they aren't even seeking compensation for lost revenue, but instead want to extort Airbus into offsetting Qatar's pandemic losses.
I don't think it is accurate to say Airbus did not want to pay for repainting. As far as I know Airbus was happy to cover the repaint costs but they were strongly objecting the notion that A350s are unsafe to fly. It does look like the Qatari regulator and Qatar Airways colluded to aggravate and inflate the gravity of A350 paint issue (which as rightfully noted, now hurts Qatar as they can't offload their huge A350 fleet).
I don't think it would be efficient to repaint the aircraft, have the paint peel off again after a couple of years, and repeat the process. That basically means down time for all A350s every 3 years or so. Qatar Airways has the right to demand a fix from Airbus, not a cover up.
@@4knetic723 Paint situation got worse because they were not flying during covid, they just sat unprotected. The reality is that they needed an excuse to not accept planes they ordered and didn't need.
@@4knetic723 it wasn't a cover up - Qatar claimed without evidence that the planes were unsafe to fly ... Qatar backtracked on that pdq then their A321neo orders were cancelled by Airbus, proving the Qatari regulator was doing what Qatar airlines were telling it to do. Fundamentally it has hurt Qatar as they will now get their narrow body order 3 years late.
Interesting analysis and POV, Coby. Honestly, I hadn’t considered the real-world possibility of Boeing repeating what they did with Singapore all those years ago. I’d have to disagree, however, as I see the 737 MAX 10 order as purely a predictable, one-off, spur-of-the-moment decision to gain what they think is _some_ leverage against Airbus, even though the latter could quite easily gain back the lost A321neo orders with another customer. I don’t believe Qatar has any intention of becoming all-Boeing, even if their relationship and subsequent partnered orderbook with Airbus is probably going to see a considerable drought over the next few years as they repair their relationship. Still, great video and interesting to see your take on the topic!
@@KR-KR Of course, the B3XM will see great return with certain carriers, and I believe the program as a whole will largely be successful. However, I don’t personally see it as a good decision for Qatar, as the types of routes they want to operate with an A21N/B3XM are long and thin. The neo delivers better on that front purely because of its range, as Coby explaned in the video. The slightly higher capacity could also offer some versatility for Qatar. Overall, I think the A321neo a better choice for Qatar individually over the MAX 10, and I think they know that as well, which is why I also think they’ll do everything to get that order back. They might keep the MAXes as well, as they could be a key asset for fleet diversity, which Qatar is known for, and shorter thin medium routes/popular short-haul routes.
Agreed. There’s always the ‘potential’, but there’re always the risks. 75 A350s aren’t anywhere near scale of 17 A340s 20 years ago, and whilst buying from the other camp ain’t cheap, but on a relative perspective, switching is more expensive!
The singapore deal succeded because it was a transition from quad to twin jets. The quads were an economical dead end that had no future. A bad paint job is not the same as two extra engines. Quatar, Airbus and Boeing are trying to play one against the other, this is a mexican standoff where all guns are empty... and it will only result in bad things for the customers.
I think airbus has a blank cartridge in its chamber because it has much more leverage than Qatar, and has other satisfied customers so they don’t necessarily care if they Qatar.
And now all A340 owners are busy getting them ready to fly again as air traffic is through the roof, post pandemic, and no one has enough seats to fill it.
Another problem that could also arise from this transition is the training of most if not all of their pilots to fly Boeing aircraft. Boeing might need to cover that too if they are going to sway Qatar to transition to an all Boeing fleet.
True. Let's say the Qatar fleet is 50/50 Airbus/Boeing. If you replace entirely one with the other, you will need to retrain 50% of your pilots, cabin crew and maintanence personal.
Qatar Airlines is notoriously fickle and difficult to deal with-Boeing should proceed VERY cautiously when dealing with them. QA has government funding and a royally-connected chairman-he can (and often does) play the prima donna. Also face-saving is important culturally which makes negotiations even more difficult.
AAB/Qatar would never go with a single manufacturer. He likes playing them against one another in order to secure lower prices. Every time they take delivery of a new type, AAB complains about how "bad" it is, hoping the mfr will throw in some concessions to calm him down. If he doesn't work the situation out with Airbus, he'd be stuck buying dubious airliners from China or Russia. Neither of those countries has yet developed a viable new commercial product, and Russia is of course cut off for the foreseeable future.
Precisely! It is of Qatar's best interest to not be an all-boeing operator. They will put down the drama and repair their relationship with airbus in no time.
This problem Boeing has now vs. the 1999 Singapore Airlines A340/777 deal is that Boeing does not have anything now to replace QR's A350s. What would QR get from Boeing after sending Boeing its A350s? The replacement is naturally Boeing 787-9 and 787-10. But Boeing currently is having massive supply chain and quality issue with 787's production, so severe that it has halted in full all deliveries of 787s for months. So there is no 787s available to be delivered to QR. Not now, not in a few years given the backlog of 787s. That means even if Boeing goes with this, QR will still not have an A350 replacement for the next 5 years most likely.
Airbus never refused to help pay for a fix matter of fact they offered all affected temporary repairs and paint until a root cause was determined in which then an engineering order would be made for a fix. Qatar refused the initial temporary offers and continued to fly their aircraft thus degrading them further.
That’s pure misinformation indeed - all other airlines with paint issues have had their planes repainted and permanent fix is nearly there too. Those planes in question are already 6 years old so they are not new planes. A drama Queen Al Bakker is a spoiled but stingy rich guy who wanted discounts on other planes because of the paint issue on a different plane 🤦🏻♂️ his strategy has backfired big time and he felt the need to sign the deal with Boeing in the White House - not like any normal airline in the office or on an airshow - he needs to feel special😂 Good riddance for Airbus and for showing Qatar that rudeness, entitlement as well as spreading false info and damaging brands to get discounts is a bad business practice. Airbus is classy and does not succumb to bullying no matter how much money you have. 🤗👍
@@pabloelsur1624 Airbus has no such understanding of the problem, nor a fix. We would have heard about it by now. They would be very vocal about it if they had.
Airbus did not refuse to repaint whilst looking for a permanent solution. Your information is inaccurate. Carbon composite fuselage painting have been a challenge for both manufacturers. The Dreamliner has been grounded for a while & the 777x is having prolonged certification too.
@@gasviation9077 As I understand it airbus has simply repaired damage and repainted without addressing the root cause. Is this wrong ? This non fix is also what Qatar objected to as opposed to a solution.
@@danharold3087 They don't know what causes the issue yet, so fixing it would be kind of difficult. The repainting is offered as a free temporary fix whilst Airbus tries to find the root cause.
A few Corrections on the video: 1 - The debut of the A350 coming to a stop during takeoff roll, was due to wrong configuration by the pilots, its the same system as the A380. Its a safety feature 2 - Airbus offered to repaint the jets for Qatar, but they refused and they want cash payments. ( a cover for the losses incurred during the covid pandemic ) 3 - There is NO WAY Qatar will let go of the A350, its been so successful in their fleet compared to all jets they fly. 4 - Qatar is not the best customer, and Boeing knows this very very well, thats why Boeing isnt rushing in head first to assist. There was a time Qatar sent back 3 787's, back to US on the same day they were delivered as they were not satisfied with "something", the jets were later delivered after 2 days, and they accepted them.
Another thing that could prevent Qatar from becoming all-Boeing is the fact that Qatar substituted their grounded Airbuses with...other Airbuses, namely A380s and A330s.
Good point, although they don’t exactly have a good replacement for the A350s on the Boeing end anyway, even the -900s, as the 787-9 simply falls too far behind in passenger capacity.
@@GenAvAviation the 787-10 seats 19 more than the a359 and Boeing is in works for a HGW -10 to boost range to match that of the 787-8 , around 14000 km. They are also working on a longer range 787-9 to exceed the range of the a350-900
@@berksaudios4359 777-9 VS 350-1000 The 777-9 has More payload Lower seat cost More powerful engines Wider cabin More seats More efficient engine More cargo space . More orders... Lol , there is absolutely nothing that makes the 350-1000 better than the 777X. Lol
@@sls12III Yeah, but some like to put emphasis that an airline ordered from a certain manufacturer (even when historically they've operated both Boeing and Airbus). For example, Lufthansa still has 787s on order despite a majority of their wide body fleet being Airbus right now. But Lufthansa has been an instigator for instilling competition between Boeing and Airbus, so it was only a matter of time before they ordered 787s.
Put me down by thinking it like this, the story behind A340 purchased by Boeing from SIA to replace it with 777 is a brilliant from the airline POV, because 777 at that time is far more efficient than A340, but to replace A350 with whatever Boeing have on the shelf is kinda taking shot to the head for Boeing, what are they gonna do? Replace it with 787 and it's endless issues, or 777x, the perfect jet but God only knows when it's ready to hit the market. I only hope that Boeing is going to deliver the best aircraft out there, not only for profit, but also the advance technology and safety as we use to know what Boeing really is
Do note that the 343 Boeing bought from SIA is not inefficient otherwise they'd have a hard time finding new homes for the jets - in fact 343 has a slightly lower trip fuel burn than 772, at a cost of slightly fewer seats, less payload, slower cruise and higher maintenance cost, in exchange of no ETOPS limitations. Basically a wash. It didn't stop SIA from buying A340 either - their SIN - EWR flights were flew by 345, not 77L, despite 340NG's efficiency disadvantage. It however stopped A330 from landing SIA for a long time. It was the most efficient twinjet of its generation and highly popular among Asian carriers. Its major disadvantage was range, yet its commonality with A340 means it's only a matter of time when A330 can threat 772, which 332 and later 333HGW did. Without this deal, they might endup being following Cathay Pacific to order only a few, only ditching them with improved 333 later on. On the other hand, SIA is a famous opportunist buyer who always source from both manufacturers. They had no reasons to turn down a good deal, and 772 did served them well.
Hi Coby just a slight correction and clarification. The autopilot did not slam on the breaks to reject a takeoff. That is not how the system works. The autopilot cannot be used for takeoff. More importantly the commander has the final say whether to reject a takeoff. In this case the problem was the database of the ROW/ROP system warning the crew that they were approaching the end of the runway. That is why the decision was made to reject. When the captain closed the thrust levers the autobrake slammed on the brakes. Maybe this where the confusion lies. The autobrake did its job as it is supposed to not the autopilot.
Your essay at the end about sitting thru a 10+ minute video also goes to the host and his ability to keep the listener hooked and ability to explane (see what i did there) the situation or subject.
But the A340 s from Singapore Airlines were not defective nor had any major problems, they were brand new , but just considered as not fuel efficient anymore compared to wide bodied twin jets , and there was ready buyers for former SIA owned jets, from African and Pacific island and Easten Europeam and South American airlines.
@@jonnyb2774 I love Airbus planes, quieter, flew on a A340 once from Hong Kong to London, lurve the 18inches economy seats, legroom, quieter cabin. arrived refreshed
Interesting topic. A couple of mistakes however: an aborted take-off is not an alarming situation, and Airbus never refused to pay to fix the problem on QA's A350, this is QA that refused the different solutions proposed by Airbus.
Airbus never refused, but they obviously downplayed the paint issue with the A350 and the under-performance of the plane. By saying the paint issue was purely 'cosmetics' and not doing any fixes for the A350 really shows just how Airbus corporate attitude is
@@Alucard-gt1zf Lol then do a quick search on Google brother, you will find that Qatar Airways are not the only airlines affected by the paint job. In fact there is more than 5 airlines who are affected by it
„Wireless carriers do this all the time“ - a very US centric take on this or any other issue from TH-cam‘s resident Boeing fanboy - waiting for your piece on why 787s are not being delivered - but let’s keep focusing on a cosmetic issue opposite to safety…
Al Bakar has brought this whole ordeal on himself, Qatar Airlines is renowned for being very picky and refusing deliveries. Regarding the paint problem this is being experienced with the 787 also as the paint has issues with adderring to a composite surface. What has rightly pissed off Airbus is Qatar's unfounded claims it is an underlying safety issue. If Qatar does end up going with Boeing you can bet your last "pound, dollar or euro" they'll be whining about Boeing's quality control within months.
Big reason why the paint failed was the conditions they are based in. 120° heat sand and dust had our Kc-135 coming back from Qatar missing a gang of paint too. Like so much paint I'd get pushed on a stand down the leading edge recoating it.
If Qatar is crying wolf with this A350 cosmetic issue, just wait till it’s hit with an actual airworthiness issue with an all Boeing fleet.😂 IMHO, AAB needs to choose his battles a bit more careful. @cobyexplanes, your videos are entertaining and speculative at best.
I could totally see Delta scooping up some of Qatar’s a350’s if they really wanted to sell them off… they just bought 7 used a350’s from LATAM and they would probably get even a bigger discount due to the repairs needed to make the finish like new again🤔😁
The A350 is covering a range/load segment Boeing has no comparable product. The 777x is bigger, eventually too big in most cases or they would not whine about the A380 as too difficult to fill. The 787 is kind of a 767 successor, but it has neither the range nor the load capacity of an A350. If the A350 has worked out for Qatar from a commercial point of view, then they won’t sell them!
Qatar won't go Boeing. Imagine the costs of training all your pilots, engineers, buying all your spares and having the extra storage required to be a dual manufaturer fleet. It's not easy as many airlines out there know. Personally given the choice of flying on an Airbus or a Boeing, given Boeing's safety record and manufacturing processes as an engineer working on both manufacturer's planes I'd choose the Airbus every time. If you want to see paint flaking off a plane have a look at practically any B787's wings, they're a patchwork quilt of bodged paint work that Boeing still hasn't rectified after more than four years! If you keep your planes in a sandbox don't expect the paint to stay on!
Great video cody. In my opinion airbus doesn't care about losing Qatar as a customer because of their current grip on the aviation market. They've already won over long time Boeing customers such as KLM and Quantas for replacing their short haul fleet. As a huge Airbus fan it is sad to seem them using their power to strongarm airlines rather than working towards a potential resolution.
Stop watching biased, crap videos made by salty crasheing fanboys. They offered solution, fixing the planes free of charge. Qatar wanted pretty much to scam them for new planes in the deal, of course Airbus said no. What else they should do, cave in and hand a few billion dollars for free to blackmailers?
Airbus has bent over backwards concerning Qatar's whining, Qatar is well known for their extremely picky nature, no manufacturer walks away easily, ask anybody in the airline industry who is at fault here and 100-1 they'll tell you its Qatar.
I don't think Qatar wants to go all Boeing. The a350 debacle seems in large part to be a grift. Qatar, whose planes have largely been sitting around anyway due to COVID, blew up what is a fairly minor issue (that Airbus offered to fix by repainting until a permanent solution is found) and got the planes grounded, so that they could sue for the "lost revenue" they never would have earned in the first place. The issue has shown up on many planes at other airlines, and regulators that aren't in Qatar have universally ruled that it doesn't affect airworthiness so long as inspections and repainting are done more frequently (which, again, Airbus has offered to cover under warranty). Though, to be clear, Airbus has also played the situation poorly by blowing up the dispute and involving unrelated orders. In doing so, they make themselves out to be a bully that other airlines will struggle to depend on for reliable delivery.
Airbus? Bully?... Really? Qatar got what they were asking for a long time. Playing it unfair way. The root cause of degradation has been explained to them, which has been ignored. The temporary but good solution has been offered, which has been declined. So Airbus lost it patience.
@@pabloelsur1624 from the perspective of a company thinking about what planes to buy, yes. Do you really want to do business with someone knowing that they might torpedo all your plans if you raise an issue or have some minor dispute? I'm not saying that they are in the wrong objectively, or that airlines will refuse to work with them. But it's absolutely something they are thinking about now. And some may choose to diversify their fleets in order to protect against this kind of disruption, or at the very least demand better terms in negotiations. It's a needless risk that only serves to weaken their position.
@@XIIchiron78 Qatar just went to far. It is a signal that's no matter if you are a BIG airline.. you can't behave unfair. Very important in current times.
After the 737 MAX debacle, if I were an airline, I would wait a very long time, before trusting Boeing management again. I don't doubt for one instance, that the Boeing workforce is nothing but very fine. Trouble is, that management scenario, still with some of the original partners still there and those that left, left with $millions of dollars as a golden handshake, underlines the fact that everybody thinks they did a good job! Airbus to their credit, always put safety at the forefront and to me thats more important than ANY thing else. In Europe that management, at the very least, would have faced manslaughter charges. Where as, in America, dollar is king. Boeing desperately, needs trustworthy management.
@@rapid13 Why would have to be an executive with Airbus, to want management to be held accountable? I have to say, the way your major companies screw their workforce, that bad management is rife in the USA. America is not a country its a business - and all that entails for everybody.
@@johnchristmas7522 So you’re not an aircraft manufacturing executive, and you clearly aren’t an executive for any US company, but you speak as if you have first hand knowledge of how the whole thing works. Where did you obtain all of this insight? Are you the CEO of some European company? I would like to understand why you think you know anything about this subject; what personal experience you have that grants you all of this specialized knowledge. I ask because you sound like you got all of your information from Facebook or maybe CNN. Neither is a reliable source, FYI.
Your confidence in Airbus is unfortunately misplaced. Airbus has had a number of really close calls that very nearly killed hundreds of people because of similar engineering errors, such as what nearly brought down Qantas Flight 72. Boeing has actually traditionally taken safety far, far, far more seriously than anybody else, and the industry has traditionally regarded Boeing as the safer option. Furthermore, since some of the old guard, pre-Max management is still present, some of that culture is still there, and likely reinstated due to the hard lesson the 737MAX debacle taught. But understand that Airbus has its own checkered history and been luckier than Boeing.
One problem, Boeing doesn't have a jet to start producing and replace the A350's with... Therefore running the risk of the QR - Airbus issue being settled before the 777's are delivered. And Airbus refusing to permanently fix the jets which are sold to Boeing... Can of worms if you ask me...
@@unconventionalideas5683 it’s not a 1 to 1 replacement. The -9x already has more capacity than most airlines want to have and puts it closer to an A380/748 competitor. The -8x also lacks any sort of flexibility as a commercial airliner that the A359/A35K offers, it can pretty much only efficiently operate ULR routes, and those aren’t very popular. It’s essentially the new 777-200LR, which was not popular at all with only 61 delivers total. And the 778 is doing even worse, it only has one single operator with 35 order options, it’s not even a firm order, and it’s cancelling as a commercial jet is still on the table as well as development and certification having been pushed back indefinitely.
This is the most ridiculous idea I have heard in the last years. Boeing doesn't need to do anything. Qatar has no choice but order aircraft from Boeing in any case.
Don’t forget that Qatar is a prickly customer. The paint chipping grounding is an excuse for airbus to pay for their profit losses due to covid flight cancellations - not paint chipping. Airbus under warranty repaints all planes with chipping of paint. They also said they would investigate the issue with the specific A350s Qatar was having take-off abortion problems with. Take-off abortions are a safety measure if anything - something Boeing would do well to improve and no company should switch to a pure Boeing fleet right now when they still have planes grounded in areas of the world due to safety concerns.
The Singapore Airline made sense as at the time Boeing was getting the B777 to obtain longer range certification which then is the reason why all four engined venues like the nice A340 become more expensive. This was abold move to propel the B777 with a seriously efficient marketting push. Now, replacing the excellent A350 (surely not with the B787) is less likely to be a good idea considering that A350 is much better then B777 in terms of performance and costs. Now, this idea of cancelling the A321Neo and moving to the Max is ridiculous as they are not in the same league whatsoever.
@@todortodorov940 The other companies A350 fly safely and even are the ones which can land in the USA without the being affected by the 5G antennas. So, normal, Airbus wants Qatar to fly the A350 as it is clear that the Quatar government agency may be under influence if not completely corrupted. So the pressure is on Qatar to prove that the A350 are unsafe to fly.
@@lucrolland7489 I love the A350. Fantastic airplane. Qatar Airways, Qatar and the Qatar aviation authorities - all brothers and cousins doing each other favors.
I feel Qatar’s difficult behavior has already been tasted by Boeing regarding the airlines’ refusal of Charleston built 787’s due to poor quality upon delivery. We shall see how that deeper relationship between Doha and Boeing develops through the recent Boeing struggles and delivery delays.
Well unlike airbus in this case , Boeing will pay Qatar for its delays. Despite its recent shortcomings , Boeing still maintains a good relationship with its customers ... Now as we speak , the 787 has been cleared for deliveries
Qatar Airways will always be a difficult customer to work with, at least until Mr Al-Baker retires. Good luck to anyone who tries. The Airbus A350 has undoubtedly experienced minor problems with regard to paint (not as extreme as the examples pictured, see other comments) but no other airline has ended up so publicly rejecting a manufacturer that currently makes the World’s most efficient single aisle airliner.
Firstly, if it comes to it, a paint job with costs split 50:50 is probably would sound to me as an overall savvy business decision for both Qartar and Airbus and if any airline even considering buying anything from boing with the 'Max' branding in its model name must be simply insane if asking a frequent air traveler like myself. First thing I check when booking a flight nowadays is to make sure that the schedule airplane is not a Max. Not even 10 horses would get me on board a Boing Max flight as short as a mile and a half.
A350 works very well all around the word except for the one company that found it very smart to try to have Airbus pay for their two non-flying Covid years. So good luck for Boeing with their new client. Just remember that it will try to have Boeing pay for all Qatar airaways drawbacks, so invest in grey paint, sure, but don't forget the bunch of layers that come with it.
Qatar has no third option to go to. And even though Boeing already works with them, Qatar is a notoriously difficult client Those type of relationships only work if they are very profitable. High maintenance clients are OK if they still make you money.. but this deal is too scary on top of the fact im sure Qatar wont be any less demanding. While i am Boeing first, Airbus is a really good company and they are not just using leverage to try to peddle bad products . They believe in what they are saying about the issues and that QTR is asking for too much. As said in the vid. this is probably more of a negotiating tactic by qatar and they will relent to airbus eventually (a little closer to the middle)
as you said there is potential but there are three big elephants in the room here...Boeing had and has massive quality control issues across its core commercial airframes...the 777x isn't flying with customers yet and it'd be foolish to rely on one airframer look at what happened to Norwegian... the 787 is grounded and who knows how long until deliveries resume again massive quality control issues...finally the max 10 is a dud its inferior to the A321neo and its variants plus that airframe is still not certified and may not be certified this year...look Boeing just way too many issues to rely on them given the massive network Qatar has
Singapore airlines deal was not even 20 aircrafts of “quad” engine aircrafts. No matter whatever is wrong with the 350s, it does not change the fact that they are really efficitent aircrafts. Buying them back is a MULTI-BILLION transaction of 50+ aircrafts that too so highly advertised as defective. Finally, boeing is in a lotta trouble already with its existing customer and delivering new aircrafts due to its own problems every year. Neither the 737 was good untill recently when they got back to the skies, 787 has its own issues and stopped deliveries and finnaly 777x, even emirates the most loyal 777 customer is fed up with the pushing deadlines. So even if we talk that this step is taken by boeing, taking orders and delivering new 50+ top models of 787 and 777 (to replace a350s i believe 787-9 or their new “er” models if they actually launch and 77w and 77x will literally take decades.) The only replacement till then will again be the existing airbus jets of 380s and 330s. I don’t think that nobody is their right minds should go for this. To have a better future for boeing, they have to live the present first. Cashing out billions of billions on aircrafts not knowing what to do with their own problems on top of that, dont seem promising.
Yeah idk I feel like Qatar is between a rock and a hard place, given that going all Boeing risks filling your fleet with frankly lower quality aircraft than Airbus is offering. They'd be chained to any potential downfalls that Boeing may incur in the future, which is possible given that Calhoun isn't overhauling the manufacturer in a way that will rectify its 20 years of engineering degradation. If I were Qatar, I'd bite the bullet and work with Airbus on the solutions they originally offered when the paint saga first started. Airbus will ultimately be the winner in this exchange, but it's better for Qatar to make that deal rather than take on a subpar fleet all the purpose of saving their pride.
Thank you for sharing. I come from the commercial airline industry. The passion of the industry stays with me. And have continue to hear and aircraft up in the sky which makes me look up in the sky all the time.
So one manufacturer had an issue where the jet stopped safely on the ground..... while the other one nosed dived the plane into the ground. Guess i know which one i want to fly on, delays are annoying and all.
I would love to see a video discussing small prop driven aircraft and the point at which it becomes economically viable to replace them with jets. I am looking at Air New Zealand as an example, who run a lot of ATR and Q300 aircraft in their reigional fleet. A lot of us regular customers that spend hours every week in small noisy prop aircraft would love them to consider quieter more comfortable jets like the CRJ or similar.
I hope this would never happen, I would definitly stop flying with Qatar (which is my favourit ariline) if they go all Boeing because I only fly boeings if I absolutely have no other alternative, Boeing does not deserve to be anything but shutdown because putting profite before engineering and lives is just immoral. I care about my life so I would not fly boeing.
Let's not get carried away. Boeing admittedly went way off course with the 737 MAX. But that plane now flies thousands of miles every day and is doing so with no problems at all. A Boeing plane today is probably the safest one in the sky right now, because of all the heavy scrutiny the company is receiving from the FAA. They can't afford another mistake and they know it. Airbus makes a fine product, but it isn't invincible. They rushed the A350 to counter the Dreamliner. The technology is new and issues are bound to be missed, like paint not adhering to your composite material., If Airbus is claiming that this is only a cosmetic issue, then it makes me think that Airbus has some of the same hubris issues as Boeing.
Okay?? Boeing has fixed alot of the problems of the 737MAX. You are dwelling in the past. Everyone can learn and move on from their mistakes. Or be an Airbus fanboy.
No I am not an Airbus fan boy, but Airbus have a better culture, ever since McDonnell Douglas took over Boeing they also infected it with their disgusting immoral Money before safety culture (and we all know that DCs use to fall from the skies) I was a huge Boeing fan (especially that they have the most beautiful planes ever made) but my friends works as engineers with them and they would not fly them. The Max only exposed a disgusting culture, yes they fixed it because it got exposed, I would never step foot on a dreamliner (as advised by my friends who work for Boeing) just because accidents didn't happen doesn't mean they want, Boeing doesn't care if people die and that is enough for me not fly their planes.
And the QA problems with 787s out of their South Carolina plant are substantial. I think Boeing is best avoided in favor of Airbus at least as a customer.
And that’s the reason, why they ordered A321’s and went to court to get the A321 so they don’t get stuck with an inferior MAX10. To bad they lost their case. Now they are stuck with the MAX10 for the foreseeable future.
@@aquaden8344 They haven’t lost the case. The case is still to be heard, which will happen in 2023. Qatar did however just loose an injunction they were seeming against Airbus to prevent them selling Qatar A320 slots to other customers.
@@ashleyw1393 I really don't know, what you are talking about. Airbus used a cross condition in the A350 contract and cancelled the A321 order. Qatar wanted an injunction to prevent Airbus from assigning their A321 production slots to other customers, but the injunction got denied. Airbus can and did assign Qatar's production slots to other airlines. What will be trailed in early 2023 is the surface degradation case of the A350 and Qatar's compensation for the grounding of their A350s. That's my understanding. If you have more information, then please post it with reference where you got the information.
Wasn't paint thing related to lack of flights over covid.. sure there is paint issue, but grounding was more to save money over covid and charge airbus over grounding? paint issue is more like excuse and paint thing could probably later solved.
Qatar's A350s are hardly faulty. Its not Airbus' fault that Qatar refuses to maintain them according to Airbus' procedures. And Airbus HAS offered to fix it which Qatar refused. Its more accurate to say that Qatar is the one who is not co-operating.
It was found to be a cosmetic issue purely, by the multiple investigations from several aviation authorities. But Qatar Airways had to be a diva and refuse the findings. Also very odd how the Qatari civil aviation authority never published their reasoning of their grounding of the affected planes.
@@dustninja9956 I can answer that.. Al baker doesn't want a paint job.he wants a paint job (and a fix of the problem) that is what he feels Airbus has not done. If it was your new car would you be a happy camper? I can also answer that question... No you would not 🤗
@@andrewlarson7895 Dude - by new you mean 6 year old car? Because planes in question are 6 years old! Qatar is irresponsible - Airbus offered a paint job and in five a fix but because of spoiled diva who wants everything fast and if not makes a tantrum and then asks for discounts on other orders, badmouthing the manufacturer… you cannot have a serious business partnership with someone like that. Don’t ask stupid questions next time because you are totally creating a FALSE EQUIVALENCY and it really stinks… 🤦🏻♂️🤗🤷🏻♂️
I'm also thinking about a similar situation happening with United where Boeing buys back United's fleet of 22 777-300ERs and exchanges them for an order of 22 777-8X and 22 777-9X and then sell the 777-300ERs to FedEx as freighter conversations.
It's called a trade in. But you get less from the dealer for the trade in than you would selling the trade in directly to the end user. Another problem is that if Boeing takes the trade in, the buyer might expect refurbishments that they otherwise would be willing to perform themselves. I suspect, in fact assume, that when planes are sold for freighter conversion, that reduces their value. FedEx operates a very large fleet of Boeing 767s and seems to be doing fine with them. I see them taking off, landing and on the ground at the regional airport near where I live. For another thing, FedEx may be moving toward increasing its use of contract carriers. If the 777 is the most economical transport, the contract carriers might have to be the buyers.
Just a couple of issues with your idea: 1. The A350s are still the ones Qatar slagged off as unserviceable and so would be worth far less on the market. Unlike the A340 deal where the aircraft still had a ready market with other airlines 2. Qatar would be putting huge commercial faith and their reputation in the hands of a company that killed 346 people with the MAX that they would be buying and a company that has so failed to meet certification and delivery deadlines with the 777X that Emirates are on the verge of cancelling their 115 aircraft order.
@@danharold3087 They all share a common interest: the safety of passengers. Or are you implying that every single avation authority is blindly following EASA's lead in protecting Airbus for commercial interests except for the Qatari one, that just 'happens' to be very closely linked to the owner of Qatar Airways?
@@Wageningst Not following but rather commonality of masters for Airbus and EASA. Were the FAA to step in it would be slapped down with the lousy job they did at boeing. What short of a serious A350 crash linked to this problem would move them to act? Nothing. Could well be that affected Qatar's planes are, at least in the short run, safe to fly. But there going to burn more fuel and look like yesterday's lunch. Airbus knew this was not something Qatar could live with and reacted poorly. Grounding the planes may be a understandable reaction if somewhat questionable. Why has airbus has not started fixing these planes?
@@danharold3087 because Qatar declined a repaint job, it's not that airbus didn't want to fix it - instead they choose to go to court if whatever reason
@@danharold3087 "commonality of masters" Just... no. First of all, this isn't the US. Airbus as a private corporation can't tell the EASA (a supranational organisation financially and politically independent from governments) what to do. The 'masters' of Airbus are private shareholders, whilst at a stretch you could call the EU commission the 'masters' of the EASA. As an organisation it is designed to be independent of national interests and political influence. Grounding the aircraft was not considered necessary by any regulator nor airline other than Qatar. Which, due to the pandemic, has seen a massive reduction in passengers and income, which has meant that they needed to ground many airplanes due to lack of demand. So here, Qatar is seeking money to compensate pandemic-related losses for aircraft they wouldn't have needed anyway.
I believe that Airbus has offered to fix the ‘cosmetic’ problem but QA don’t believe Airbus has found the root cause and are offering a band aid of a fix.
Something to consider. I would rather fly in an Airbus than in a Boeing. They are much more comfortable and quiet. If I feel so, how many other people feel this way?
@@tylex-v must say the newer Boeings are better. I guess because there are so may of them and so many getting older that there's a feeling of less trust in the older ones.
@@johnstone7697 There's a significant difference between an A 350 and a 777. The 350 is way less noisy inside the cabin, that's recognizable even for people not knowing much about aircraft
Because the content is not that amazing to people who really know about the world of aviation - also this biased Boeing admiration/praise without mentioning their failures while giving fake/wrong info on Airbus is way too obvious and it stinks 🤷🏻♂️🤗
Qatar has been leasing/buying aircraft from other carriers though, like LatAm, Oman, and Sri Lankan. They're not quite as screwed as you may think. I think the Boeing order is mostly just posturing.
Boeing's deal with SIA worked, because 772 was a viable alternative to 343. However would it work with Qatar? Currently both Qatar's 359 and 35K often fly alongside 77L. It would be only until 787HGW EIS Boeing would have an efficient 359 alternative, and chances are it still can't match on the longest routes. We also know 778 is expected to be less efficient than 35K according to Qantas, and it's not ready before late 2020s anyway. MAX10 at least can fly current A321CEO routes, and they've seen how it flew in Air Italy. It just can't fly potential 321LR routes.
I think Boeing will benefit this deal. It can study fly-by-wire system on the A350 and fit it in their future 777s and 787s by taking it apart. It can also discount the 787 deal by exchanging the A350s and subtract their price to the 787 order. If they don't need the A350s anymore, it can sell it to the last optional customer, the bank of Utah, which is known for scraping airplanes.
An excellent analysis as usual. I have been following this airline news story and it is very refreshing to to get your business perspective Coby. Great video.
As a Qatar frequent flyer I really hope this doesn't happen, I think QSuite on the A350 is currently the best product on the market and I don't see that changing until maybe a 777x version, but given Boeing's recent track record I have safety concerns about flying the 777x.
Choosing a single airframe vendor has a number of benefits you didn't mention. Spares, training, maintenance, etc. And those are enormously important to airlines and make major financial impact.
And it makes airline's bargaining power very, very low. So what they save for one type services, they loose while buying overpriced planes without ability to bargain.
I never thought about the issue from this perspective. While it sounds interesting, I honestly couldn’t see it happening, as that would be financially unviable for both Qatar and Boeing. Intriguing idea though.
I just discovered this channel. Colby (Coby?) has a great voice and his presentation is top quality professionalism. The only problem is I'm totally sick of Qatar Airlines and Airbus paint issue.
I will not be surprised if QA will go back to airbus and get the neos.does anyone think Boeing will buy the A350s back ??in the current financial situation,I dnt see it happening..but,who can tell
Call me crazy, but alot of people that owns a big company has to do anything! Yes. Anything to reduce money cost so their business/anything would still run.
The best party to come out of this is Airbus. Qatar has been "playing around" with Airbus for a while now and ditching Qatar at least until they have sane management is the best move. I think QATAR will regret the move as the A350 is an excellent aircraft from the passenger's point of view.
I think sharing "the third largest 777 customer" would have been enough. Specifying "on earth" suggests there are larger customers off earth and that doesnt seem likely.
If a potential customer is sufficiently difficult to deal with, it might be better to leave them alone to tie up the management resources of your competitor. Some customers just aren't worth the grief they inflict.
Wouldn't it be a problem for Boeing to be out there trying to sell 50+ lightly used A350's to airlines in place of new and more expensive---and more profitable---787's and 777's??? Seems like they would be losing sales with one hand to make sales with the other hand. Unless they only sell them to all-Airbus airlines. Hmmmm.
During its 2004 CCAA (Chapter 11 in Canada), Air Canada renegotiated its aircraft leases to its advantage. It was an Airbus shop. Boaing launcehd the 787 and it didn't do well. Then came Air Canada, freshly out of CCAA and placed a huge order for 787s , an order along Air India,s which launched the 787 popularity (at the same time as Boeing moved the 787 to 9 across seating by default). Air Canada also bought 777s (and later 737 MAX to become an an almost all Boeing shop. ) part of the deal with Boeing involved Boeing buying out Air Canada's A340 leases, which came at a profit for Air Canada because of the downward value of leases renegotiated during CCAA. Boeing then sold the aircrafdt to other lessors who found users for them. Such deals are fairly common. And Boeing didn't lose money on the 340s at the same time as gaining a big customer for 787s, 777 and 737s. Boeing buying 340s not only allows it to increase sales if its own aircraft, but by dumping the 340s on the used market reduces new sales for Airbus. At for the year end pissing contest, Boeing can brag about higher sales of widebodies than Airbus.
I am not sure that Airbus hasn't made any step toward Quatar! Quatar Airways thought they could ask millions to Airbus (Covid effects impacted all ). We shall see in the near future who was right.
When you said that Boeing has money to buy the Airbus I almost choked with laughter. After a pandemic that paralyzed everything and the disaster of its 737 Max, the last thing Boeing has right now is money to support anything.
Boeing is a huge weapons manufacturer and space contractor. For all its slovenliness it feeds greedily from the generous sustenance of the well endowed Pentagon. It wouldn't be short of a dollar even after the 737 MAX disasters and the ongoing 777X issues.
@@rais1953 Ah, from what I understand from your words, Boeing is a camouflaged arms company with a civilian division. Since you can use the money of the military division to defray the expenses of the civil one.
@@jandroniol I don't know if it's camouflage, no doubt they want to make money from commercial aircraft too but US armaments manufacturing seems to have almost unlimited scope for gouging from the poor taxpayer.
@@rais1953 They haven't got much money to fall back on from the military side either, since there is a massive cost overrun and compensation from Pegasus KC46 programme.
Boeing simply doesn't have the cash. If they couldn't quickly onsell the jets without a loss, that's a massive amount of capital tied up (capital that could be better spent on say a NSA/NMA)
@@mark123655 Boeing was able to sell 25 billion in debt. If there's any company that can raise the funds, its Boeing. there's only 1 competitor and that's Airbus.
@@d_mosimann Boeing is changing big time going back to old school like when I worked for them, everyone will see the change, the airlines pilots maintenance flight attendants, all reports say they love the max.
@@andrewlarson7895 Change like solving the problems with the 787, or finaly releasing the 777x, or building the non existing 797, or inventing the non existing competitor for the A321xlr, or designing the non existing competitor for the A220? You mean changes like that?
I can't see Qatar dumping their A350"s when there's already a bit of wait for the 777X and are short of jetliners as it is; But then again Delta got rid of all its 777 for 2022. Maybe Delta will take the A350's off of Qatar's plate if the price is right ?
Try being a little more balanced. You might get some more subscribers. Also you might want to do an episode on the faulty Boeing 737 Max. Netflix did a good one.
Oh Coby - speculation followed by speculation mixed with false info about Airbus not wanting to pay and fix the issue… you are a Boeing boy and that’s fine with me but trying to cut Airbus by spreading misinformation is a cheap move. I thought you were better than that. Disappointing. 🤷🏻♂️🙄👎
My thoughts are purely through personal experience, but I've always found Airbus to offer me a better experience. Stepping directly from a highly rated Dreamliner to an A350, the A350 won hands down. A320 family beats 737, A340 beats 767 (15 years ago). I'll take Airbus everytime!!
It depends, the Boeing family offers many better things than arbus, the humidity and breath of the 787 is superior to the 350 and that is important to me, since I use double masks to travel on planes. A good configuration well done in the 737 as southwest has it is enough to make it comfortable and without saying that the 737 has its advantages too. And despite the fact that the 767 is older than the 340, the 2-3-2 configuration is more comfortable and in my opinion more pleasant than a few more chairs with the a340 with 2-4-2 (the supposed configuration of the 787 that only Japan paid attention) Do not misunderstand me, I love all the planes from the 1903 Wright Flyer to the new prototypes of current and hydrogen, but I know wisely which plane to choose according to the circumstances
@@sergiolaurencio7534 Dream on, doesn’t matter what Boeing plane, they are always louder more crowded, and less comfortable. Airbus has it’s disadvantages also, but at end they are the more pleasant travel experience, no matter how many technical things you add up.
The Qatari A350s/Contract would have many buyers however they will have certain demands and requirements for a deal to take place. Notable potential buyers that are impatient to add the A350 are Emirates, Saudi Airlines (not likely/rumored) and the new Saudi Flag Carrier (Most likely winner). What I would recommend Qatar Airways to do is to solve this issue with Airbus because of mainly a financial decision and only not being owned by only one aircraft manufacturer.
When you buy a plane with millions of dollars you won't want the paint to peel off. And in this case the peeling of the plane affected the planes' carbon structure. Airbus and Europe's agencies suck for being biased and not looking it in terms of safety for people.
If you look at SWA's model, they only fly Boeing therefore their pilots are all used to the airplanes. I know that flying international requires a larger array of type, however many systems, cockpit layout, quirks etc are common within manufacturer. I think it's wise to have all Boeing or airbus as long as the aircraft can fulfill the need. One comparison not made in the comparison of 737 max 10 or A321NEO is average consumption. That could make a big difference considering todays fuel costs.
Another great video! I believe more recently, at Farnborough, Qatar has firmed up those 737-Max orders, and greatly increased their number. As Coby intimates, Airbus must have really made the airline angry.
Airbus does not make a better aircraft than boing it’s the other way around . Boeing makes a much better airframe than airbus thats why there better freighters your 100 percent wrong , I’m. Not saying airbus is bad just boing is much better!!
@@williammcgraw9779 you must be American...the Max is an example of Boeing "better" aircraft that they introduced a single point of failure and they make these aircraft by any joe bloggs from the street at their South carolina factory. Airbus aircraft are superior, even when they buy an aircraft programme....
@@AshMundo Literally the only people defending Boeing at this point are Americans, Boeing is a symbol of pride to them and they can't stand people criticising it even though said company killed hundreds of people out of greed...
@@williammcgraw9779 You might get proven wrong about the freighters. There are the A321 P2F conversions on the horizon, that Boeing has a hard time to compete with. And then there is this fat pig, financed by naive Qatari, called 777X-8F. The future will show, if Boeing can maintain it’s market position with underperforming products, or if the freighter market is turning around like the passenger plane market did, you never know. Bidding based on past glory might be misleading.
DIA is the airport code of the OLD Doha airport which closed to commercial traffic 1 year before the A350 did the JFK flight. It's actually DOH that it was flying to.
Go to curiositystream.thld.co/coby_0322 and use the code COBY to save 25% off today, that's only $14.99 a year. Thanks to Curiosity Stream for sponsoring today's video.
Does it come with Nebula?
Coby... You are such a handsome stud- muffin😉😋🤤! . I really enjoyed this episode. Imo, I think Airbus is completely in the wrong by denying the severity of the paint defect on their A350's, and if they do this to Qatar, they have to do it to all the other carriers who purchased the same aircraft type. Personally, I strongly believe the integrity of the composite material is seriously compromised by ignoring or trying to downplay the problem and saying that it's just cosmetic. I hope Qatar sues Airbus to either redo the livery paint, or buy back their own aircraft at near full price ✈️.
I bet Boeing could strip the paint off those A350s, and repaint them, and then re-sell them...
I think it would be really stupid for Qatar to do that. Boeing will have control over Qatar with no fear of losing it as a customer and with the recent history of Boeing that will be the worst strategic decision. We are just witnessing German realizing it puts its energy security to Russia and guess what happened, he acted without fear. Qatar should resolve this issue with Airbus, but my question is why are other airlines not suing Airbus too?
Yayyyyy🎊🥳
Happy third anniversary
And 100k parrrrrty😇🤝🏻👌🏽
You're missing an important point that Qatar Airlines is widely known for being the most difficult and picky customer. They've spend the last 10 years busy burning any relationship they had with Airbus, and they've been doing the same with Boeing too. Airbus has evidently had enough, and Boeing won't come to their rescue either. IF there is some sort of A350/B777X swap deal, it will be on favourable Boeing terms only.
Great explanation.
Thanks for the explanation. I was wondering they Airbus would risk losing such a big customer.
Embraer has entered the chat
@@Roguescienceguy just left the chat knowing Qatar is involved
And there are two more issues to mention:
1. The 777X still isn't flying. And if it is flying someday, there are other customers who have to be serve first.
2. The 737 MAX is simply unconscionable for Qatars customers. It is a plane only for low budget traffic and has still the taint of the horror crashes years ago.
This video is ridiculous. Boeing would spend billions on buying those 53 A350, only to get the most difficult client in the industry to fight with them about the numerous problems of their own aircraft.
Boeing wouldn't buy the Airbus because Qatar had firm order for the 777X and 737 order is not that large.
A difficult client, but also one that would have burnt bridges with the only viable competition. Those list prices would become a reality for once.
Agreed. This idea is not only infeasible but the return on investment here would be uncertain and really 53 jets…. You’d hope to ever come close to that on sales. So break even maybe?
Especially since the last decade has been nothing but problems with Boeing planes. Qutar would literally be the worst customer for Boeing.
Qatar is about to destroy themselves if they leave airbus
Correction: Airbus offered Qatar and other customers to repaint the airplanes under warranty, free of charge. Qatar wanted an explanation why the paint was peeling and did not accept the explanation Airbus offered, as they did not believe this was the "root cause" of the problem. They demanded Airbus investigate further, which Airbus did not, or to what we know, did not in a way that was to satisfy Qatar. Then the disputes escalated.
After the first round of touch up in... I forget, NL? or something.. it's been determined that the cause is due to the conductive metal mesh layer over parts of the air craft. They've cleared that its cosmetic only and will work on a solution. airbus believes that Qatar airways had their gov suspend the planes as an out to receive subsidies from its own gov during well.. now. However, Qatar Air complaining about the aesthetics of the planes isnt new. They've always been picky upon delivery. so.. you're the judge of this situation
From what I've heard, as there are multiple airlines reporting paint issues, Airbus has offered them complimentary repaints as a temporary fix whilst they determine the root cause. Aside from Qatar all airlines accepted this.
Apparently the aircraft Qatar filmed was due a scheduled repaint anyway and had been sitting outside unprotected for months due to a lack of demand. So the paint issues were made to look far worse than they'd otherwise be.
@@mikeblatzheim2797 i think they figured it out that it was the lighting meatl mesh under the paint, there where offered repaints but the issue would obviously still be there and the a total fix would take several years or maybe never, because the new planes come with a different one so Airbus is not as heavily invested.
@Kranky. K! Even when You strip all paint of the airbus, it still will not crash..
@Kranky. K! A paint problem won’t crash an airplane, it’s not a structural problem.
2:27 Afaik, Airbus does do the fix, free of charge (As for every other airline). The real issue is that they are not willing to pay a compensation for the grounding, that is kinda dubious, since the quatari authorities (who have close ties to Quatar Airlines) are the only ones who grounded the jet.
I know, the difference sounds minor, but makes a huge difference morally (and in court).
It's sort of a big point to not understand or miss... We're talking about an airline being run by a family member of the dictator of Qatar...
Since Qatar is having fewer passengers due to the pandemic most of the aircraft in question have been sitting on the ground for months anyways. So they aren't even seeking compensation for lost revenue, but instead want to extort Airbus into offsetting Qatar's pandemic losses.
@@mikeblatzheim2797 some customers are best left to the competition.
I don't think it is accurate to say Airbus did not want to pay for repainting. As far as I know Airbus was happy to cover the repaint costs but they were strongly objecting the notion that A350s are unsafe to fly. It does look like the Qatari regulator and Qatar Airways colluded to aggravate and inflate the gravity of A350 paint issue (which as rightfully noted, now hurts Qatar as they can't offload their huge A350 fleet).
I have more reservations with Boeing, after the 737 Max debacle, than I would have with Airbus in regard to unsafe airplanes.
I don't think it would be efficient to repaint the aircraft, have the paint peel off again after a couple of years, and repeat the process.
That basically means down time for all A350s every 3 years or so.
Qatar Airways has the right to demand a fix from Airbus, not a cover up.
@@4knetic723 Paint situation got worse because they were not flying during covid, they just sat unprotected. The reality is that they needed an excuse to not accept planes they ordered and didn't need.
@@4knetic723 Airbus explicitly said they offered the repaint as a way to bridge the time while they were working on the root cause.
@@4knetic723 it wasn't a cover up - Qatar claimed without evidence that the planes were unsafe to fly ... Qatar backtracked on that pdq then their A321neo orders were cancelled by Airbus, proving the Qatari regulator was doing what Qatar airlines were telling it to do. Fundamentally it has hurt Qatar as they will now get their narrow body order 3 years late.
Interesting analysis and POV, Coby. Honestly, I hadn’t considered the real-world possibility of Boeing repeating what they did with Singapore all those years ago. I’d have to disagree, however, as I see the 737 MAX 10 order as purely a predictable, one-off, spur-of-the-moment decision to gain what they think is _some_ leverage against Airbus, even though the latter could quite easily gain back the lost A321neo orders with another customer. I don’t believe Qatar has any intention of becoming all-Boeing, even if their relationship and subsequent partnered orderbook with Airbus is probably going to see a considerable drought over the next few years as they repair their relationship. Still, great video and interesting to see your take on the topic!
I feel like it could have its niche on denser routes- like on the us west coast for Alaska
@@KR-KR Of course, the B3XM will see great return with certain carriers, and I believe the program as a whole will largely be successful. However, I don’t personally see it as a good decision for Qatar, as the types of routes they want to operate with an A21N/B3XM are long and thin. The neo delivers better on that front purely because of its range, as Coby explaned in the video. The slightly higher capacity could also offer some versatility for Qatar. Overall, I think the A321neo a better choice for Qatar individually over the MAX 10, and I think they know that as well, which is why I also think they’ll do everything to get that order back. They might keep the MAXes as well, as they could be a key asset for fleet diversity, which Qatar is known for, and shorter thin medium routes/popular short-haul routes.
Good analysis, but I think as long as Mr. Al-Bakr is in charge at Quatar there is no way back, at least from Airbus' POV...
Agreed. There’s always the ‘potential’, but there’re always the risks. 75 A350s aren’t anywhere near scale of 17 A340s 20 years ago, and whilst buying from the other camp ain’t cheap, but on a relative perspective, switching is more expensive!
They won’t have a choice if Airbus won’t sell to them.
The singapore deal succeded because it was a transition from quad to twin jets. The quads were an economical dead end that had no future. A bad paint job is not the same as two extra engines. Quatar, Airbus and Boeing are trying to play one against the other, this is a mexican standoff where all guns are empty... and it will only result in bad things for the customers.
"a mexican standoff where all guns are empty" love it:-)
I think airbus has a blank cartridge in its chamber because it has much more leverage than Qatar, and has other satisfied customers so they don’t necessarily care if they Qatar.
What did Boeing do with those A340s?
And now all A340 owners are busy getting them ready to fly again as air traffic is through the roof, post pandemic, and no one has enough seats to fill it.
Another problem that could also arise from this transition is the training of most if not all of their pilots to fly Boeing aircraft. Boeing might need to cover that too if they are going to sway Qatar to transition to an all Boeing fleet.
That depends tbh. Qatar does have 777s and 787s.
True. Let's say the Qatar fleet is 50/50 Airbus/Boeing. If you replace entirely one with the other, you will need to retrain 50% of your pilots, cabin crew and maintanence personal.
Qatar Airlines is notoriously fickle and difficult to deal with-Boeing should proceed VERY cautiously when dealing with them. QA has government funding and a royally-connected chairman-he can (and often does) play the prima donna. Also face-saving is important culturally which makes negotiations even more difficult.
AAB/Qatar would never go with a single manufacturer. He likes playing them against one another in order to secure lower prices. Every time they take delivery of a new type, AAB complains about how "bad" it is, hoping the mfr will throw in some concessions to calm him down. If he doesn't work the situation out with Airbus, he'd be stuck buying dubious airliners from China or Russia. Neither of those countries has yet developed a viable new commercial product, and Russia is of course cut off for the foreseeable future.
Precisely! It is of Qatar's best interest to not be an all-boeing operator. They will put down the drama and repair their relationship with airbus in no time.
This problem Boeing has now vs. the 1999 Singapore Airlines A340/777 deal is that Boeing does not have anything now to replace QR's A350s. What would QR get from Boeing after sending Boeing its A350s? The replacement is naturally Boeing 787-9 and 787-10. But Boeing currently is having massive supply chain and quality issue with 787's production, so severe that it has halted in full all deliveries of 787s for months. So there is no 787s available to be delivered to QR. Not now, not in a few years given the backlog of 787s. That means even if Boeing goes with this, QR will still not have an A350 replacement for the next 5 years most likely.
Airbus never refused to help pay for a fix matter of fact they offered all affected temporary repairs and paint until a root cause was determined in which then an engineering order would be made for a fix. Qatar refused the initial temporary offers and continued to fly their aircraft thus degrading them further.
Yeah, I don't know what he has against Airbus 💀
Karen Albaker almost makes Boeings questionable management seem smart with his piss poor mentality
That’s pure misinformation indeed - all other airlines with paint issues have had their planes repainted and permanent fix is nearly there too. Those planes in question are already 6 years old so they are not new planes. A drama Queen Al Bakker is a spoiled but stingy rich guy who wanted discounts on other planes because of the paint issue on a different plane 🤦🏻♂️ his strategy has backfired big time and he felt the need to sign the deal with Boeing in the White House - not like any normal airline in the office or on an airshow - he needs to feel special😂 Good riddance for Airbus and for showing Qatar that rudeness, entitlement as well as spreading false info and damaging brands to get discounts is a bad business practice. Airbus is classy and does not succumb to bullying no matter how much money you have. 🤗👍
A root cause has been determined many months ago, but Qatar decided to ignore it.
@@pabloelsur1624 Airbus has no such understanding of the problem, nor a fix. We would have heard about it by now. They would be very vocal about it if they had.
Airbus did not refuse to repaint whilst looking for a permanent solution. Your information is inaccurate. Carbon composite fuselage painting have been a challenge for both manufacturers. The Dreamliner has been grounded for a while & the 777x is having prolonged certification too.
Airbus has been aware of this 'paint' problem for years. It should be fixed and all but forgotten by now. What is up with that ?
@@danharold3087 other a350s that had paint problems have been fixed, except Qatar refused to fix them.
@@gasviation9077 As I understand it airbus has simply repaired damage and repainted without addressing the root cause. Is this wrong ? This non fix is also what Qatar objected to as opposed to a solution.
@@danharold3087
They don't know what causes the issue yet, so fixing it would be kind of difficult. The repainting is offered as a free temporary fix whilst Airbus tries to find the root cause.
@@gasviation9077 no garanty
A few Corrections on the video:
1 - The debut of the A350 coming to a stop during takeoff roll, was due to wrong configuration by the pilots, its the same system as the A380. Its a safety feature
2 - Airbus offered to repaint the jets for Qatar, but they refused and they want cash payments. ( a cover for the losses incurred during the covid pandemic )
3 - There is NO WAY Qatar will let go of the A350, its been so successful in their fleet compared to all jets they fly.
4 - Qatar is not the best customer, and Boeing knows this very very well, thats why Boeing isnt rushing in head first to assist. There was a time Qatar sent back 3 787's, back to US on the same day they were delivered as they were not satisfied with "something", the jets were later delivered after 2 days, and they accepted them.
Another thing that could prevent Qatar from becoming all-Boeing is the fact that Qatar substituted their grounded Airbuses with...other Airbuses, namely A380s and A330s.
Good point, although they don’t exactly have a good replacement for the A350s on the Boeing end anyway, even the -900s, as the 787-9 simply falls too far behind in passenger capacity.
Did they but or lease them though? If they are leased as a temporary replacement while they buy new Boeing ones a transition isn't impossible.
@@GenAvAviation not right now, it could be replaced via the 777X’s however
A350-900 -> 777-8X
A350-1000 -> 777-9X
@@GenAvAviation the 787-10 seats 19 more than the a359 and Boeing is in works for a HGW -10 to boost range to match that of the 787-8 , around 14000 km. They are also working on a longer range 787-9 to exceed the range of the a350-900
@@berksaudios4359
777-9 VS 350-1000
The 777-9 has
More payload
Lower seat cost
More powerful engines
Wider cabin
More seats
More efficient engine
More cargo space .
More orders...
Lol , there is absolutely nothing that makes the 350-1000 better than the 777X. Lol
While the Singapore stunt played out nicely in the 2000s, SIA now operates about twice as many A350s as 777s
Singapore grabs whatever is the next best thing for them. They still have 31 777-9s on order.
@@fighter5583 you're describing every airline in the world.
@@sls12III Yeah, but some like to put emphasis that an airline ordered from a certain manufacturer (even when historically they've operated both Boeing and Airbus). For example, Lufthansa still has 787s on order despite a majority of their wide body fleet being Airbus right now. But Lufthansa has been an instigator for instilling competition between Boeing and Airbus, so it was only a matter of time before they ordered 787s.
@@fighter5583 Not true, Lufthansa was launching customer for 747-8 and 777X.
@@rampar77 You basically reinforced my point. Also, Qatar was the launch customer for the 777x, not Lufthansa.
Put me down by thinking it like this, the story behind A340 purchased by Boeing from SIA to replace it with 777 is a brilliant from the airline POV, because 777 at that time is far more efficient than A340, but to replace A350 with whatever Boeing have on the shelf is kinda taking shot to the head for Boeing, what are they gonna do? Replace it with 787 and it's endless issues, or 777x, the perfect jet but God only knows when it's ready to hit the market. I only hope that Boeing is going to deliver the best aircraft out there, not only for profit, but also the advance technology and safety as we use to know what Boeing really is
Yeah, Boeing buys the A359s but still delays with the replacement 777X, thats a dangerous path 🤔
Do note that the 343 Boeing bought from SIA is not inefficient otherwise they'd have a hard time finding new homes for the jets - in fact 343 has a slightly lower trip fuel burn than 772, at a cost of slightly fewer seats, less payload, slower cruise and higher maintenance cost, in exchange of no ETOPS limitations. Basically a wash.
It didn't stop SIA from buying A340 either - their SIN - EWR flights were flew by 345, not 77L, despite 340NG's efficiency disadvantage.
It however stopped A330 from landing SIA for a long time. It was the most efficient twinjet of its generation and highly popular among Asian carriers. Its major disadvantage was range, yet its commonality with A340 means it's only a matter of time when A330 can threat 772, which 332 and later 333HGW did. Without this deal, they might endup being following Cathay Pacific to order only a few, only ditching them with improved 333 later on.
On the other hand, SIA is a famous opportunist buyer who always source from both manufacturers. They had no reasons to turn down a good deal, and 772 did served them well.
@@steinwaldmadchen another thing is SIA dont keep their aircraft, somebody correct me, for longer than 5 or 10 years?
@@kkrsnn5632 It's more like 15-18 yrs..
What "endless" 787 issues are you talking about precisely?
Hi Coby just a slight correction and clarification. The autopilot did not slam on the breaks to reject a takeoff. That is not how the system works. The autopilot cannot be used for takeoff. More importantly the commander has the final say whether to reject a takeoff. In this case the problem was the database of the ROW/ROP system warning the crew that they were approaching the end of the runway. That is why the decision was made to reject. When the captain closed the thrust levers the autobrake slammed on the brakes. Maybe this where the confusion lies. The autobrake did its job as it is supposed to not the autopilot.
Your essay at the end about sitting thru a 10+ minute video also goes to the host and his ability to keep the listener hooked and ability to explane (see what i did there) the situation or subject.
But the A340 s from Singapore Airlines were not defective nor had any major problems, they were brand new , but just considered as not fuel efficient anymore compared to wide bodied twin jets , and there was ready buyers for former SIA owned jets, from African and Pacific island and Easten Europeam and South American airlines.
Tbf, I’m sure there’s plenty of folks who would happily pay for the350s given they would likely be repainting them anyways
@@jonnyb2774 I love Airbus planes, quieter, flew on a A340 once from Hong Kong to London, lurve the 18inches economy seats, legroom, quieter cabin. arrived refreshed
Interesting topic. A couple of mistakes however: an aborted take-off is not an alarming situation, and Airbus never refused to pay to fix the problem on QA's A350, this is QA that refused the different solutions proposed by Airbus.
Yeah type rated on the 350 and there's a number of things you can stop for especially before a 100kts and it's not in Autopilot during the TO roll
Airbus never refused, but they obviously downplayed the paint issue with the A350 and the under-performance of the plane. By saying the paint issue was purely 'cosmetics' and not doing any fixes for the A350 really shows just how Airbus corporate attitude is
@@Kuricang31 what issues,it literally doesn't affect anything other than looks
@@Alucard-gt1zf Lol then do a quick search on Google brother, you will find that Qatar Airways are not the only airlines affected by the paint job. In fact there is more than 5 airlines who are affected by it
@@Alucard-gt1zf Corrosion prevention, drag, and possible shit clogging the engines.
„Wireless carriers do this all the time“ - a very US centric take on this or any other issue from TH-cam‘s resident Boeing fanboy - waiting for your piece on why 787s are not being delivered - but let’s keep focusing on a cosmetic issue opposite to safety…
Al Bakar has brought this whole ordeal on himself, Qatar Airlines is renowned for being very picky and refusing deliveries. Regarding the paint problem this is being experienced with the 787 also as the paint has issues with adderring to a composite surface. What has rightly pissed off Airbus is Qatar's unfounded claims it is an underlying safety issue.
If Qatar does end up going with Boeing you can bet your last "pound, dollar or euro" they'll be whining about Boeing's quality control within months.
Big reason why the paint failed was the conditions they are based in. 120° heat sand and dust had our Kc-135 coming back from Qatar missing a gang of paint too. Like so much paint I'd get pushed on a stand down the leading edge recoating it.
If Qatar is crying wolf with this A350 cosmetic issue, just wait till it’s hit with an actual airworthiness issue with an all Boeing fleet.😂 IMHO, AAB needs to choose his battles a bit more careful.
@cobyexplanes, your videos are entertaining and speculative at best.
I could totally see Delta scooping up some of Qatar’s a350’s if they really wanted to sell them off… they just bought 7 used a350’s from LATAM and they would probably get even a bigger discount due to the repairs needed to make the finish like new again🤔😁
Especially if Delta can get the defective A350's for a reduced price.
Boeing Capital facilitated the transfer of Southwest (AirTran) 717s to Delta so they could very well do the same with ex-Qatar A350s
The A350 is covering a range/load segment Boeing has no comparable product. The 777x is bigger, eventually too big in most cases or they would not whine about the A380 as too difficult to fill. The 787 is kind of a 767 successor, but it has neither the range nor the load capacity of an A350. If the A350 has worked out for Qatar from a commercial point of view, then they won’t sell them!
Pp
Delta will have to repaint them anyway.
Qatar won't go Boeing. Imagine the costs of training all your pilots, engineers, buying all your spares and having the extra storage required to be a dual manufaturer fleet. It's not easy as many airlines out there know.
Personally given the choice of flying on an Airbus or a Boeing, given Boeing's safety record and manufacturing processes as an engineer working on both manufacturer's planes I'd choose the Airbus every time. If you want to see paint flaking off a plane have a look at practically any B787's wings, they're a patchwork quilt of bodged paint work that Boeing still hasn't rectified after more than four years!
If you keep your planes in a sandbox don't expect the paint to stay on!
and Boeing hasnt got Aircraft that fit the role of the A350s and 320s as good as Airbus does
Great video cody. In my opinion airbus doesn't care about losing Qatar as a customer because of their current grip on the aviation market. They've already won over long time Boeing customers such as KLM and Quantas for replacing their short haul fleet. As a huge Airbus fan it is sad to seem them using their power to strongarm airlines rather than working towards a potential resolution.
Airbus using power play in the current aviation power balance in not a good sign for the future, but Qatar is also a particularly difficult client.
Stop watching biased, crap videos made by salty crasheing fanboys. They offered solution, fixing the planes free of charge. Qatar wanted pretty much to scam them for new planes in the deal, of course Airbus said no. What else they should do, cave in and hand a few billion dollars for free to blackmailers?
Airbus has bent over backwards concerning Qatar's whining, Qatar is well known for their extremely picky nature, no manufacturer walks away easily, ask anybody in the airline industry who is at fault here and 100-1 they'll tell you its Qatar.
Qatar are also being nutheads, ...terms have to be favourable for both parties not just Qatar if they have to resolve this
I don't think Qatar wants to go all Boeing. The a350 debacle seems in large part to be a grift. Qatar, whose planes have largely been sitting around anyway due to COVID, blew up what is a fairly minor issue (that Airbus offered to fix by repainting until a permanent solution is found) and got the planes grounded, so that they could sue for the "lost revenue" they never would have earned in the first place. The issue has shown up on many planes at other airlines, and regulators that aren't in Qatar have universally ruled that it doesn't affect airworthiness so long as inspections and repainting are done more frequently (which, again, Airbus has offered to cover under warranty).
Though, to be clear, Airbus has also played the situation poorly by blowing up the dispute and involving unrelated orders. In doing so, they make themselves out to be a bully that other airlines will struggle to depend on for reliable delivery.
Airbus? Bully?... Really? Qatar got what they were asking for a long time. Playing it unfair way. The root cause of degradation has been explained to them, which has been ignored. The temporary but good solution has been offered, which has been declined. So Airbus lost it patience.
@@pabloelsur1624 from the perspective of a company thinking about what planes to buy, yes. Do you really want to do business with someone knowing that they might torpedo all your plans if you raise an issue or have some minor dispute?
I'm not saying that they are in the wrong objectively, or that airlines will refuse to work with them. But it's absolutely something they are thinking about now. And some may choose to diversify their fleets in order to protect against this kind of disruption, or at the very least demand better terms in negotiations.
It's a needless risk that only serves to weaken their position.
@@XIIchiron78 Qatar just went to far. It is a signal that's no matter if you are a BIG airline.. you can't behave unfair. Very important in current times.
@@pabloelsur1624 In what universe do big businesses have to play fair?
@@danharold3087 In our. They shall remember about it.
After the 737 MAX debacle, if I were an airline, I would wait a very long time, before trusting Boeing management again. I don't doubt for one instance, that the Boeing workforce is nothing but very fine. Trouble is, that management scenario, still with some of the original partners still there and those that left, left with $millions of dollars as a golden handshake, underlines the fact that everybody thinks they did a good job! Airbus to their credit, always put safety at the forefront and to me thats more important than ANY thing else. In Europe that management, at the very least, would have faced manslaughter charges. Where as, in America, dollar is king. Boeing desperately, needs trustworthy management.
Did I get that right, it’s about the paint? If so, at least the plane flies, which is not given for all other‘s on the market.
Sooo…you’re an executive with Airbus?
@@rapid13 Why would have to be an executive with Airbus, to want management to be held accountable? I have to say, the way your major companies screw their workforce, that bad management is rife in the USA. America is not a country its a business - and all that entails for everybody.
@@johnchristmas7522 So you’re not an aircraft manufacturing executive, and you clearly aren’t an executive for any US company, but you speak as if you have first hand knowledge of how the whole thing works. Where did you obtain all of this insight? Are you the CEO of some European company? I would like to understand why you think you know anything about this subject; what personal experience you have that grants you all of this specialized knowledge.
I ask because you sound like you got all of your information from Facebook or maybe CNN. Neither is a reliable source, FYI.
Your confidence in Airbus is unfortunately misplaced. Airbus has had a number of really close calls that very nearly killed hundreds of people because of similar engineering errors, such as what nearly brought down Qantas Flight 72. Boeing has actually traditionally taken safety far, far, far more seriously than anybody else, and the industry has traditionally regarded Boeing as the safer option. Furthermore, since some of the old guard, pre-Max management is still present, some of that culture is still there, and likely reinstated due to the hard lesson the 737MAX debacle taught. But understand that Airbus has its own checkered history and been luckier than Boeing.
One problem, Boeing doesn't have a jet to start producing and replace the A350's with... Therefore running the risk of the QR - Airbus issue being settled before the 777's are delivered.
And Airbus refusing to permanently fix the jets which are sold to Boeing...
Can of worms if you ask me...
They will eventually have 777X to replace the A350 aircraft.
@@unconventionalideas5683 it’s not a 1 to 1 replacement. The -9x already has more capacity than most airlines want to have and puts it closer to an A380/748 competitor. The -8x also lacks any sort of flexibility as a commercial airliner that the A359/A35K offers, it can pretty much only efficiently operate ULR routes, and those aren’t very popular. It’s essentially the new 777-200LR, which was not popular at all with only 61 delivers total. And the 778 is doing even worse, it only has one single operator with 35 order options, it’s not even a firm order, and it’s cancelling as a commercial jet is still on the table as well as development and certification having been pushed back indefinitely.
This is the most ridiculous idea I have heard in the last years. Boeing doesn't need to do anything. Qatar has no choice but order aircraft from Boeing in any case.
True, plus by buying all of Qatar Airways' Airbus's Boeing would effectively be giving their planes to them for free.
@@LunaticTheCat This is what Qatar is hoping for ;)
Don’t forget that Qatar is a prickly customer. The paint chipping grounding is an excuse for airbus to pay for their profit losses due to covid flight cancellations - not paint chipping. Airbus under warranty repaints all planes with chipping of paint. They also said they would investigate the issue with the specific A350s Qatar was having take-off abortion problems with. Take-off abortions are a safety measure if anything - something Boeing would do well to improve and no company should switch to a pure Boeing fleet right now when they still have planes grounded in areas of the world due to safety concerns.
The Singapore Airline made sense as at the time Boeing was getting the B777 to obtain longer range certification which then is the reason why all four engined venues like the nice A340 become more expensive. This was abold move to propel the B777 with a seriously efficient marketting push. Now, replacing the excellent A350 (surely not with the B787) is less likely to be a good idea considering that A350 is much better then B777 in terms of performance and costs. Now, this idea of cancelling the A321Neo and moving to the Max is ridiculous as they are not in the same league whatsoever.
Exactly. If the B737 MAX was such a great replacement for Qatar, why is Qatar fighting in court to re-activate the A321 orders :-/
@@todortodorov940 The other companies A350 fly safely and even are the ones which can land in the USA without the being affected by the 5G antennas. So, normal, Airbus wants Qatar to fly the A350 as it is clear that the Quatar government agency may be under influence if not completely corrupted. So the pressure is on Qatar to prove that the A350 are unsafe to fly.
@@lucrolland7489 I love the A350. Fantastic airplane. Qatar Airways, Qatar and the Qatar aviation authorities - all brothers and cousins doing each other favors.
I feel Qatar’s difficult behavior has already been tasted by Boeing regarding the airlines’ refusal of Charleston built 787’s due to poor quality upon delivery. We shall see how that deeper relationship between Doha and Boeing develops through the recent Boeing struggles and delivery delays.
Well unlike airbus in this case , Boeing will pay Qatar for its delays. Despite its recent shortcomings , Boeing still maintains a good relationship with its customers ...
Now as we speak , the 787 has been cleared for deliveries
Qatar Airways will always be a difficult customer to work with, at least until Mr Al-Baker retires. Good luck to anyone who tries. The Airbus A350 has undoubtedly experienced minor problems with regard to paint (not as extreme as the examples pictured, see other comments) but no other airline has ended up so publicly rejecting a manufacturer that currently makes the World’s most efficient single aisle airliner.
Firstly, if it comes to it, a paint job with costs split 50:50 is probably would sound to me as an overall savvy business decision for both Qartar and Airbus and if any airline even considering buying anything from boing with the 'Max' branding in its model name must be simply insane if asking a frequent air traveler like myself. First thing I check when booking a flight nowadays is to make sure that the schedule airplane is not a Max. Not even 10 horses would get me on board a Boing Max flight as short as a mile and a half.
A350 works very well all around the word except for the one company that found it very smart to try to have Airbus pay for their two non-flying Covid years. So good luck for Boeing with their new client. Just remember that it will try to have Boeing pay for all Qatar airaways drawbacks, so invest in grey paint, sure, but don't forget the bunch of layers that come with it.
Qatar has no third option to go to. And even though Boeing already works with them, Qatar is a notoriously difficult client Those type of relationships only work if they are very profitable. High maintenance clients are OK if they still make you money.. but this deal is too scary on top of the fact im sure Qatar wont be any less demanding.
While i am Boeing first, Airbus is a really good company and they are not just using leverage to try to peddle bad products . They believe in what they are saying about the issues and that QTR is asking for too much. As said in the vid. this is probably more of a negotiating tactic by qatar and they will relent to airbus eventually (a little closer to the middle)
Boeing also bought three brandnew A310-200s from Kuwait Airways in 1985, a trade-in for three 767-200ERs. They then sold them to Pan Am in late 1985.
Really like the strategic business discussions on this channel. Keep it up!
as you said there is potential but there are three big elephants in the room here...Boeing had and has massive quality control issues across its core commercial airframes...the 777x isn't flying with customers yet and it'd be foolish to rely on one airframer look at what happened to Norwegian... the 787 is grounded and who knows how long until deliveries resume again massive quality control issues...finally the max 10 is a dud its inferior to the A321neo and its variants plus that airframe is still not certified and may not be certified this year...look Boeing just way too many issues to rely on them given the massive network Qatar has
Singapore airlines deal was not even 20 aircrafts of “quad” engine aircrafts. No matter whatever is wrong with the 350s, it does not change the fact that they are really efficitent aircrafts.
Buying them back is a MULTI-BILLION transaction of 50+ aircrafts that too so highly advertised as defective.
Finally, boeing is in a lotta trouble already with its existing customer and delivering new aircrafts due to its own problems every year. Neither the 737 was good untill recently when they got back to the skies, 787 has its own issues and stopped deliveries and finnaly 777x, even emirates the most loyal 777 customer is fed up with the pushing deadlines. So even if we talk that this step is taken by boeing, taking orders and delivering new 50+ top models of 787 and 777 (to replace a350s i believe 787-9 or their new “er” models if they actually launch and 77w and 77x will literally take decades.) The only replacement till then will again be the existing airbus jets of 380s and 330s.
I don’t think that nobody is their right minds should go for this. To have a better future for boeing, they have to live the present first. Cashing out billions of billions on aircrafts not knowing what to do with their own problems on top of that, dont seem promising.
Boeing also used this strategy when they acquired ERJ-190's from Air Canada to help land their MAX order.
Yeah idk I feel like Qatar is between a rock and a hard place, given that going all Boeing risks filling your fleet with frankly lower quality aircraft than Airbus is offering. They'd be chained to any potential downfalls that Boeing may incur in the future, which is possible given that Calhoun isn't overhauling the manufacturer in a way that will rectify its 20 years of engineering degradation. If I were Qatar, I'd bite the bullet and work with Airbus on the solutions they originally offered when the paint saga first started. Airbus will ultimately be the winner in this exchange, but it's better for Qatar to make that deal rather than take on a subpar fleet all the purpose of saving their pride.
It’s not about fixing the plains, it’s the huge compensation Qatar demands for grounded planes, that would have been grounded anyway due to covid.
It’s too late, Qatar isn’t willing to lose face.
Thank you for sharing. I come from the commercial airline industry. The passion of the industry stays with me. And have continue to hear and aircraft up in the sky which makes me look up in the sky all the time.
So one manufacturer had an issue where the jet stopped safely on the ground..... while the other one nosed dived the plane into the ground.
Guess i know which one i want to fly on, delays are annoying and all.
I would love to see a video discussing small prop driven aircraft and the point at which it becomes economically viable to replace them with jets. I am looking at Air New Zealand as an example, who run a lot of ATR and Q300 aircraft in their reigional fleet. A lot of us regular customers that spend hours every week in small noisy prop aircraft would love them to consider quieter more comfortable jets like the CRJ or similar.
You willing to pay the extra cost for the jet or expect turbo prop prices?
I hope this would never happen, I would definitly stop flying with Qatar (which is my favourit ariline) if they go all Boeing because I only fly boeings if I absolutely have no other alternative, Boeing does not deserve to be anything but shutdown because putting profite before engineering and lives is just immoral. I care about my life so I would not fly boeing.
Let's not get carried away. Boeing admittedly went way off course with the 737 MAX. But that plane now flies thousands of miles every day and is doing so with no problems at all. A Boeing plane today is probably the safest one in the sky right now, because of all the heavy scrutiny the company is receiving from the FAA. They can't afford another mistake and they know it. Airbus makes a fine product, but it isn't invincible. They rushed the A350 to counter the Dreamliner. The technology is new and issues are bound to be missed, like paint not adhering to your composite material., If Airbus is claiming that this is only a cosmetic issue, then it makes me think that Airbus has some of the same hubris issues as Boeing.
Okay?? Boeing has fixed alot of the problems of the 737MAX. You are dwelling in the past. Everyone can learn and move on from their mistakes. Or be an Airbus fanboy.
No I am not an Airbus fan boy, but Airbus have a better culture, ever since McDonnell Douglas took over Boeing they also infected it with their disgusting immoral Money before safety culture (and we all know that DCs use to fall from the skies)
I was a huge Boeing fan (especially that they have the most beautiful planes ever made) but my friends works as engineers with them and they would not fly them. The Max only exposed a disgusting culture, yes they fixed it because it got exposed, I would never step foot on a dreamliner (as advised by my friends who work for Boeing) just because accidents didn't happen doesn't mean they want, Boeing doesn't care if people die and that is enough for me not fly their planes.
Count me in.
And the QA problems with 787s out of their South Carolina plant are substantial. I think Boeing is best avoided in favor of Airbus at least as a customer.
I’m sure Qatar already did a business case for the 737-10 before they even purchased the A321 so they already knew what they were getting into.
And that’s the reason, why they ordered A321’s and went to court to get the A321 so they don’t get stuck with an inferior MAX10. To bad they lost their case. Now they are stuck with the MAX10 for the foreseeable future.
@@aquaden8344 They haven’t lost the case. The case is still to be heard, which will happen in 2023.
Qatar did however just loose an injunction they were seeming against Airbus to prevent them selling Qatar A320 slots to other customers.
@@ashleyw1393 I really don't know, what you are talking about. Airbus used a cross condition in the A350 contract and cancelled the A321 order. Qatar wanted an injunction to prevent Airbus from assigning their A321 production slots to other customers, but the injunction got denied. Airbus can and did assign Qatar's production slots to other airlines.
What will be trailed in early 2023 is the surface degradation case of the A350 and Qatar's compensation for the grounding of their A350s.
That's my understanding. If you have more information, then please post it with reference where you got the information.
Easy to sit through this: fantastic shots of these beautiful aircraft. Great presentation.
Wasn't paint thing related to lack of flights over covid.. sure there is paint issue, but grounding was more to save money over covid and charge airbus over grounding?
paint issue is more like excuse and paint thing could probably later solved.
Qatar's A350s are hardly faulty. Its not Airbus' fault that Qatar refuses to maintain them according to Airbus' procedures. And Airbus HAS offered to fix it which Qatar refused. Its more accurate to say that Qatar is the one who is not co-operating.
It was found to be a cosmetic issue purely, by the multiple investigations from several aviation authorities. But Qatar Airways had to be a diva and refuse the findings. Also very odd how the Qatari civil aviation authority never published their reasoning of their grounding of the affected planes.
@@dustninja9956 I can answer that.. Al baker doesn't want a paint job.he wants a paint job (and a fix of the problem) that is what he feels Airbus has not done. If it was your new car would you be a happy camper? I can also answer that question... No you would not 🤗
@@andrewlarson7895 Dude - by new you mean 6 year old car? Because planes in question are 6 years old! Qatar is irresponsible - Airbus offered a paint job and in five a fix but because of spoiled diva who wants everything fast and if not makes a tantrum and then asks for discounts on other orders, badmouthing the manufacturer… you cannot have a serious business partnership with someone like that.
Don’t ask stupid questions next time because you are totally creating a FALSE EQUIVALENCY and it really stinks… 🤦🏻♂️🤗🤷🏻♂️
@@remi_gio yeah I would pissed if my car started peeling paint 10 years from now.its not by far the only airline company complaining.
@@andrewlarson7895 But Qatar is the only one saying its a safety issue. Everyone else who has the problem, says its only costmetic
I'm also thinking about a similar situation happening with United where Boeing buys back United's fleet of 22 777-300ERs and exchanges them for an order of 22 777-8X and 22 777-9X and then sell the 777-300ERs to FedEx as freighter conversations.
It's called a trade in. But you get less from the dealer for the trade in than you would selling the trade in directly to the end user. Another problem is that if Boeing takes the trade in, the buyer might expect refurbishments that they otherwise would be willing to perform themselves. I suspect, in fact assume, that when planes are sold for freighter conversion, that reduces their value.
FedEx operates a very large fleet of Boeing 767s and seems to be doing fine with them. I see them taking off, landing and on the ground at the regional airport near where I live. For another thing, FedEx may be moving toward increasing its use of contract carriers. If the 777 is the most economical transport, the contract carriers might have to be the buyers.
Just a couple of issues with your idea:
1. The A350s are still the ones Qatar slagged off as unserviceable and so would be worth far less on the market. Unlike the A340 deal where the aircraft still had a ready market with other airlines
2. Qatar would be putting huge commercial faith and their reputation in the hands of a company that killed 346 people with the MAX that they would be buying and a company that has so failed to meet certification and delivery deadlines with the 777X that Emirates are on the verge of cancelling their 115 aircraft order.
Only Qatar Airways and the Qatar Civil Aviation Authority take the position that they do. They are at odds with other operators and EASA plus FAA.
The FAA with its own problems is not likely to look for more trouble by stomping on EASA's toes. EASA and Airbus share common interest.
@@danharold3087 They all share a common interest: the safety of passengers. Or are you implying that every single avation authority is blindly following EASA's lead in protecting Airbus for commercial interests except for the Qatari one, that just 'happens' to be very closely linked to the owner of Qatar Airways?
@@Wageningst Not following but rather commonality of masters for Airbus and EASA. Were the FAA to step in it would be slapped down with the lousy job they did at boeing. What short of a serious A350 crash linked to this problem would move them to act? Nothing.
Could well be that affected Qatar's planes are, at least in the short run, safe to fly. But there going to burn more fuel and look like yesterday's lunch. Airbus knew this was not something Qatar could live with and reacted poorly. Grounding the planes may be a understandable reaction if somewhat questionable. Why has airbus has not started fixing these planes?
@@danharold3087 because Qatar declined a repaint job, it's not that airbus didn't want to fix it - instead they choose to go to court if whatever reason
@@danharold3087
"commonality of masters"
Just... no. First of all, this isn't the US. Airbus as a private corporation can't tell the EASA (a supranational organisation financially and politically independent from governments) what to do. The 'masters' of Airbus are private shareholders, whilst at a stretch you could call the EU commission the 'masters' of the EASA. As an organisation it is designed to be independent of national interests and political influence.
Grounding the aircraft was not considered necessary by any regulator nor airline other than Qatar. Which, due to the pandemic, has seen a massive reduction in passengers and income, which has meant that they needed to ground many airplanes due to lack of demand. So here, Qatar is seeking money to compensate pandemic-related losses for aircraft they wouldn't have needed anyway.
I believe that Airbus has offered to fix the ‘cosmetic’ problem but QA don’t believe Airbus has found the root cause and are offering a band aid of a fix.
Something to consider. I would rather fly in an Airbus than in a Boeing. They are much more comfortable and quiet. If I feel so, how many other people feel this way?
Very few, I suspect. Most can't tell the difference.
Im okay with both
@@tylex-v must say the newer Boeings are better. I guess because there are so may of them and so many getting older that there's a feeling of less trust in the older ones.
@@johnstone7697 There's a significant difference between an A 350 and a 777. The 350 is way less noisy inside the cabin, that's recognizable even for people not knowing much about aircraft
how the hell do you only have 98K subs... thanks for the quality content. hope to see you with more subs and on Nebula soon!!!!!
Because the content is not that amazing to people who really know about the world of aviation - also this biased Boeing admiration/praise without mentioning their failures while giving fake/wrong info on Airbus is way too obvious and it stinks 🤷🏻♂️🤗
Qatar has been leasing/buying aircraft from other carriers though, like LatAm, Oman, and Sri Lankan. They're not quite as screwed as you may think. I think the Boeing order is mostly just posturing.
Boeing's deal with SIA worked, because 772 was a viable alternative to 343.
However would it work with Qatar?
Currently both Qatar's 359 and 35K often fly alongside 77L. It would be only until 787HGW EIS Boeing would have an efficient 359 alternative, and chances are it still can't match on the longest routes.
We also know 778 is expected to be less efficient than 35K according to Qantas, and it's not ready before late 2020s anyway.
MAX10 at least can fly current A321CEO routes, and they've seen how it flew in Air Italy. It just can't fly potential 321LR routes.
I think Boeing will benefit this deal. It can study fly-by-wire system on the A350 and fit it in their future 777s and 787s by taking it apart. It can also discount the 787 deal by exchanging the A350s and subtract their price to the 787 order. If they don't need the A350s anymore, it can sell it to the last optional customer, the bank of Utah, which is known for scraping airplanes.
An excellent analysis as usual. I have been following this airline news story and it is very refreshing to to get your business perspective Coby. Great video.
The entire problem with this plan is it requires Akbar Al Baker to be loyal to Boeing and he does not know the meaning of the word IMHO.
As a Qatar frequent flyer I really hope this doesn't happen, I think QSuite on the A350 is currently the best product on the market and I don't see that changing until maybe a 777x version, but given Boeing's recent track record I have safety concerns about flying the 777x.
Choosing a single airframe vendor has a number of benefits you didn't mention. Spares, training, maintenance, etc. And those are enormously important to airlines and make major financial impact.
And it makes airline's bargaining power very, very low. So what they save for one type services, they loose while buying overpriced planes without ability to bargain.
I never thought about the issue from this perspective. While it sounds interesting, I honestly couldn’t see it happening, as that would be financially unviable for both Qatar and Boeing. Intriguing idea though.
I just discovered this channel. Colby (Coby?) has a great voice and his presentation is top quality professionalism.
The only problem is I'm totally sick of Qatar Airlines and Airbus paint issue.
Al Baker is a shroud and cunning fox..he plays everything in his book to get vast discount and quality .he will go to who ever gives him good value...
Indeed, no reason to help him with loads of money while expecting some long term gains.
I will not be surprised if QA will go back to airbus and get the neos.does anyone think Boeing will buy the A350s back ??in the current financial situation,I dnt see it happening..but,who can tell
Call me crazy, but alot of people that owns a big company has to do anything! Yes. Anything to reduce money cost so their business/anything would still run.
The best party to come out of this is Airbus. Qatar has been "playing around" with Airbus for a while now and ditching Qatar at least until they have sane management is the best move. I think QATAR will regret the move as the A350 is an excellent aircraft from the passenger's point of view.
Nah. Boeing has much better use of the cash to develop it's next aircraft.
I think they use the money for the new 777X.
I think sharing "the third largest 777 customer" would have been enough. Specifying "on earth" suggests there are larger customers off earth and that doesnt seem likely.
If Boeing bought the A350, they would at least have one good plane...
Not the A350 aircraft itself, This video is about IF Boeing buys Qatar Airways' 53 A350s, not the entire program.
@@spacejetande-jetfan798 of course. It was a joke.
777 is good
If a potential customer is sufficiently difficult to deal with, it might be better to leave them alone to tie up the management resources of your competitor. Some customers just aren't worth the grief they inflict.
With the price of jetliners, it is worth it putting up with a lot of grief to get the order.
Wouldn't it be a problem for Boeing to be out there trying to sell 50+ lightly used A350's to airlines in place of new and more expensive---and more profitable---787's and 777's??? Seems like they would be losing sales with one hand to make sales with the other hand. Unless they only sell them to all-Airbus airlines. Hmmmm.
During its 2004 CCAA (Chapter 11 in Canada), Air Canada renegotiated its aircraft leases to its advantage. It was an Airbus shop. Boaing launcehd the 787 and it didn't do well. Then came Air Canada, freshly out of CCAA and placed a huge order for 787s , an order along Air India,s which launched the 787 popularity (at the same time as Boeing moved the 787 to 9 across seating by default). Air Canada also bought 777s (and later 737 MAX to become an an almost all Boeing shop. )
part of the deal with Boeing involved Boeing buying out Air Canada's A340 leases, which came at a profit for Air Canada because of the downward value of leases renegotiated during CCAA. Boeing then sold the aircrafdt to other lessors who found users for them.
Such deals are fairly common. And Boeing didn't lose money on the 340s at the same time as gaining a big customer for 787s, 777 and 737s.
Boeing buying 340s not only allows it to increase sales if its own aircraft, but by dumping the 340s on the used market reduces new sales for Airbus. At for the year end pissing contest, Boeing can brag about higher sales of widebodies than Airbus.
Boeing also bought 20 E190 from Air Canada to secure the 737 Max deal
I am not sure that Airbus hasn't made any step toward Quatar! Quatar Airways thought they could ask millions to Airbus (Covid effects impacted all ). We shall see in the near future who was right.
I wasn't aware this was a comedy channel. Amazing content, definitely original material and pretty funny.
When you said that Boeing has money to buy the Airbus I almost choked with laughter. After a pandemic that paralyzed everything and the disaster of its 737 Max, the last thing Boeing has right now is money to support anything.
Boeing is a huge weapons manufacturer and space contractor. For all its slovenliness it feeds greedily from the generous sustenance of the well endowed Pentagon. It wouldn't be short of a dollar even after the 737 MAX disasters and the ongoing 777X issues.
@@rais1953 Ah, from what I understand from your words, Boeing is a camouflaged arms company with a civilian division. Since you can use the money of the military division to defray the expenses of the civil one.
@@jandroniol I don't know if it's camouflage, no doubt they want to make money from commercial aircraft too but US armaments manufacturing seems to have almost unlimited scope for gouging from the poor taxpayer.
@@rais1953 They haven't got much money to fall back on from the military side either, since there is a massive cost overrun and compensation from Pegasus KC46 programme.
@@ChrisBarrow-617 It would be nice to think that incompetence had consequences in big corporations but I'm sure the Pentagon will give them a hand up.
Boeing simply doesn't have the cash. If they couldn't quickly onsell the jets without a loss, that's a massive amount of capital tied up (capital that could be better spent on say a NSA/NMA)
16 Billion is cash reserves, they had 20 billion in fiscal year 2020, plus the US won't let Boeing fail they have too many military contracts.
@@downtownno89 $60+BN of debt, the banks won't let them hand over that amount of cash, they need to stay within certain targets
@@mark123655 Boeing was able to sell 25 billion in debt. If there's any company that can raise the funds, its Boeing. there's only 1 competitor and that's Airbus.
Holy Crap your subscribers ballooned! So proud of you man, been here since 15k
Anybody who still buys Boeing civil aircrafts is beyond help.
Max is fixed Airbus has skeletons in their closet
@@andrewlarson7895 Skeletons can be fixed, a greedy and ignorant management can't.
@@d_mosimann Boeing is changing big time going back to old school like when I worked for them, everyone will see the change, the airlines pilots maintenance flight attendants, all reports say they love the max.
@@d_mosimann their all greedy so is airbus. They've done pulled a lot of dirty s***
@@andrewlarson7895 Change like solving the problems with the 787, or finaly releasing the 777x, or building the non existing 797, or inventing the non existing competitor for the A321xlr, or designing the non existing competitor for the A220? You mean changes like that?
I can't see Qatar dumping their A350"s when there's already a bit of wait for the 777X and are short of jetliners as it is; But then again Delta got rid of all its 777 for 2022. Maybe Delta will take the A350's off of Qatar's plate if the price is right ?
Try being a little more balanced. You might get some more subscribers.
Also you might want to do an episode on the faulty Boeing 737 Max. Netflix did a good one.
Congrats on 100k subscribers!
Oh Coby - speculation followed by speculation mixed with false info about Airbus not wanting to pay and fix the issue… you are a Boeing boy and that’s fine with me but trying to cut Airbus by spreading misinformation is a cheap move. I thought you were better than that. Disappointing. 🤷🏻♂️🙄👎
Usually I get annoyed when youtubers ask you to sub but the fact you’re not at 100k yet is a travesty. Let’s get you there!
My thoughts are purely through personal experience, but I've always found Airbus to offer me a better experience. Stepping directly from a highly rated Dreamliner to an A350, the A350 won hands down. A320 family beats 737, A340 beats 767 (15 years ago). I'll take Airbus everytime!!
It depends, the Boeing family offers many better things than arbus, the humidity and breath of the 787 is superior to the 350 and that is important to me, since I use double masks to travel on planes. A good configuration well done in the 737 as southwest has it is enough to make it comfortable and without saying that the 737 has its advantages too. And despite the fact that the 767 is older than the 340, the 2-3-2 configuration is more comfortable and in my opinion more pleasant than a few more chairs with the a340 with 2-4-2 (the supposed configuration of the 787 that only Japan paid attention) Do not misunderstand me, I love all the planes from the 1903 Wright Flyer to the new prototypes of current and hydrogen, but I know wisely which plane to choose according to the circumstances
But.... Boeing have some upsides too..
@@sergiolaurencio7534 Dream on, doesn’t matter what Boeing plane, they are always louder more crowded, and less comfortable. Airbus has it’s disadvantages also, but at end they are the more pleasant travel experience, no matter how many technical things you add up.
The Qatari A350s/Contract would have many buyers however they will have certain demands and requirements for a deal to take place. Notable potential buyers that are impatient to add the A350 are Emirates, Saudi Airlines (not likely/rumored) and the new Saudi Flag Carrier (Most likely winner). What I would recommend Qatar Airways to do is to solve this issue with Airbus because of mainly a financial decision and only not being owned by only one aircraft manufacturer.
I am in full support of airbus as they care a lot more about their customers unlike boeing who cares more about money than its customers.
🤣🤣🤣
When you buy a plane with millions of dollars you won't want the paint to peel off. And in this case the peeling of the plane affected the planes' carbon structure. Airbus and Europe's agencies suck for being biased and not looking it in terms of safety for people.
This is silly. Never going to happen.
If you look at SWA's model, they only fly Boeing therefore their pilots are all used to the airplanes. I know that flying international requires a larger array of type, however many systems, cockpit layout, quirks etc are common within manufacturer. I think it's wise to have all Boeing or airbus as long as the aircraft can fulfill the need. One comparison not made in the comparison of 737 max 10 or A321NEO is average consumption. That could make a big difference considering todays fuel costs.
What a load of nonsense. You have no idea what has been going on behind the scenes. So to say that Airbus has not been co-operating is total rubbish.
Another great video! I believe more recently, at Farnborough, Qatar has firmed up those 737-Max orders, and greatly increased their number. As Coby intimates, Airbus must have really made the airline angry.
Airbus aircraft are superior to Boeings.
Qatar doesn't own the A350s anymore as they did a leaseback deal.
The topcoat issue just needs rectifying.
Airbus does not make a better aircraft than boing it’s the other way around . Boeing makes a much better airframe than airbus thats why there better freighters your 100 percent wrong , I’m. Not saying airbus is bad just boing is much better!!
@@williammcgraw9779 you must be American...the Max is an example of Boeing "better" aircraft that they introduced a single point of failure and they make these aircraft by any joe bloggs from the street at their South carolina factory.
Airbus aircraft are superior, even when they buy an aircraft programme....
@@AshMundo Literally the only people defending Boeing at this point are Americans, Boeing is a symbol of pride to them and they can't stand people criticising it even though said company killed hundreds of people out of greed...
@@williammcgraw9779 You might get proven wrong about the freighters. There are the A321 P2F conversions on the horizon, that Boeing has a hard time to compete with. And then there is this fat pig, financed by naive Qatari, called 777X-8F. The future will show, if Boeing can maintain it’s market position with underperforming products, or if the freighter market is turning around like the passenger plane market did, you never know. Bidding based on past glory might be misleading.
I usually sit with some snacks while watching ur vids. "Let me explain" is what i come here for
Paid agent of Boeing?
Yeah I don't know what he has against Airbus, the points he made about Airbus in between the videos 😂
TF has to do about Coby being Boeing boy?? Hmmm.
Happy Anniversary Ben Binge watching all your TH-cam videos I see you pass 100k subs too cool keep up the good work
DIA is the airport code of the OLD Doha airport which closed to commercial traffic 1 year before the A350 did the JFK flight. It's actually DOH that it was flying to.