If it isn't selling, what' the point? Airlines simple don't buy them to loose money. I made a trip last 9dec on it from Luanda to Lisbon TAP. Nothing special. Small space for people in economy class. I prefer Taag 777-300ER. Neo only a more silent cabin but more erratic and unconftble feeling in turbulence. Don't forget. I well remember those sreeming engines of 330 Ceo or worst in 340. Then you stop to see and hear the lovely roar and silent GE115B passing over you.
@@antoniosoares2903 Small space is the choice of airliner not airbus.Even that B777-300ER is just a normal plane you cant compare it with A350-900/1000 or A380 in terms of range,efficiency and comfortability.
The comparison between the B787 & the A330NEO fails to take into account what really matter. The well documented production, & safety problems of the B787 are really not resolved. Like the B737MAX Boeing dropped the ball by short changing safety concerns to increase profits. Boeign is playing "russian ruollett" with safety & it's future.
@@antoniosoares2903 TAAG 777-300ER has 9 abreast seat in economy class. However, many other airlines put 10 abreast on their 777-300. 8 Abreast A330 is roomier than 10 abreast 777.
Hakan Evin that doesn’t really make sense man. Anyways I think it’s selling ok, but without going outside Airbus here the first gen A330’s are still being sold and A350s would hamper these newer A330 sales also
@@robbieshaft Check Hawaiian Airlines case, just a single example how Airbus used A330Neo to cut Boeing's profit by minimum $200M in a single project: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_Airlines#Boeing_787-9 And this is not the only example. 787 is like a toast squeezed between A330Neo by price from below and A350 by technology/quality from above. 787 may never break even with this competition. As you know its development costs were huge and costs are still mostly there even after 10 years of production.
@@robbieshaft If being is making less money, they have less money for research. Lack of research means sub-par planes in the future for arbus to compete with.
@@user-yt198 The problem with Boeing is, that their mentality is, that they are far superior to everyone else in the industry. Which 2 of their latest planes the 737 Max and 787 Dreamliner have shown. Both planes were rushed to market, with the 787 having major issues, that were costly to repair after delivery, and the 737 so flawed, that it should never have been build (even considering the potential orders dangeling in front of Beoing CEOs.
Simon Lyngbo regarding the 787, the battery issues are long fixed now and it’s outselling A330N, 737 is a problem too obviously but for different reasons, this was always gonna effect the company as a whole
To be fair, despite the A330neo being a bit less successful at being a popular jet, it still sells well. Many operators from the A330 don’t want to over spend for the A350, this jet kind slip in the middle but still do the work and still successful for the operators.
Despite the MAX having a more modern airframe, the 737 is still an old design with cables running along the frame to operate the aerodynamic surfaces. It is an old concept. There's now way around it. The A330 is a fully Fly-by-wire aircraft, so it means it benefits from all the current computer and software technology. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the A330NEO cockpit to be in many aspects, more modern than the 787.
temossemi Well, I don’t believe they really have to fix the MAX. They only needed to train the pilots on this new variant. Training pilots = new type rate certification = more downtime and costs for the clients. ...that was the reason for MCAS implementation. Which is not an excuse for the awful implementation job they did in the MAX.
So wait - I always thought that the A350 would be the main competitor to the 787? And what exactly would be a reason for an airline to take the A330neo instead of the A350?
Yannick - The A350 competes more against the 777. That said, I’m surprised at how many seats can be fitted in an A350-900 in 3 classes. The A350-1000 is the same length as the Boeing 777-300(ER) but much lighter.
Sales dismal at best...throw out the bogus Iran air order... which will probably never happen.....and a whopping 250 units sold.... slapping on a dreamliner engine .. hardly matters much..
The 777x and a330neo are in two completely different classes. A misconception is that the 787 is a better comparison to the a350 because they are both new and use composites, but the a350 is quite a bit larger than the 787
The author of this video and many others missed that the neo is just a "new engine option" of the A330 and the A330 ceo+neo outsold the 787 since 2014.
Plus, the 787's systems are very complex and spare parts mostly have to be bought new, whereas an A330 is much simpler and there is a big 2nd hand market for parts.
@@fartingfury I heard though that the 787's adoptation of a more electric architecture helps simplify some of its systems e.g. undercarriage wiring & piping
@@lzh4950 Well, for example there's no pneumatic (compressed air) system on the 787, so for sure that's much simpler. But there's a catch: Any system that would have run from compressed air on other aircraft (notably the air conditioning) now has to run on electricity, which means a heavier and more complex electrical network, and an entirely new air conditioning system (that the mechanics are not familiar with, that can only be repaired in a limited number of places and which is probably heavier). An airline might decide the trade-off is worth it (getting electricity from the engines is much more efficient than taking compressed air from them) but it introduces new complexities (even while eliminating some old ones). But I was mostly referring to the computers controlling all the systems - I've been told (but cannot confirm) that they're a bit of a pain to deal with. And I saw the wiring of an earlier aircraft's avionic bay : I personally found it extremely untidy and disorganised...
Anh Quan Chu yeah but then there’s usually only two pairs in the entire plane, not everyone wants to sit all the way at the back and most airlines now charge for seat selection
@@shahimagesyt As of November 787 has 84 orders and 27 cancellations (Net 57), Airbus has 64 orders and 3 cancellations (Net 61) plus 5 more CEO cancellations
The A330 is an economic machine in sub 4000mile routes and it's way more comfortable for the folks in economy vs 787. Which would you rather cross the Atlantic in?
Well, before everyone gets a little too crazy into the A330neo being a smashing success, one needs to understand that the A330neo role isn't to be the comparison to the 787-9 as many are making it to be. The purpose that the A330neo serves are quite simple. The first is to act in the same manner as the 747-8 did to the A380. While 747-8 was essentially a revamp of the 747-400, it still had enough upgrades to allow it to be somewhat competitive against the A380 without Boeing having to swallow the high costs of creating an all new design. While widebody twins killed the A380, the 747-8 did chip some ice off the iceberg and most certainly killed the A380's chances as a freighter. The A330-900neo allows Airbus to chip away at the competitor sales of the 787 without breaking the bank. Which brings to the 2nd reason. The 787-9 may be too much aircraft for some airlines, and price most certainly can be prohibitive for others, so by offering an aircraft with a much lower purchasing cost than the new 787, and add excellent economics combined with an already successful platform, you then are offering a product that can be very attractive to those airlines looking for something a little cheaper. That being said, the A350 is also too much airplane as well for some airlines and it's not by accident that operators who looked at the A350 have either revamped their orders to include the A330neo or out right changed it and eliminated the A350 in favor of the A330neo. It gives Airbus flexibility and also options to sell both airplanes as a package deal to airlines with commonality as a key selling point. Third- The A330neo allows Airbus to maximize the A330 production line, allowing it to remain open, and to buy Airbus time to create a replacement for this segment which it will eventually have to do. It is the same concept as with Boeing and the 737Max and with Airbus A320neo. Take an already successful product, add improvements to it that will increase the economics of the plane without having to spend high amounts of money on development costs. What's not smart about that? It's very obvious that neither manufacturer are warm and fuzzy about creating an all new design at this time. It can be for various reasons, but my guess is that it may be related to the issues that are plaguing the engine manufacturers as they seem to all be having problems. And that too may tie into the fact that Airbus and Boeing may be waiting a bit to allow for technology to catch up with what Airlines are demanding. But the A330neo isn't killing the sales of the 787. The 787 will continue to be improved as the design matures like any other aircraft and the A330neo will be obsolete eventually. that's just the cycle of aircraft design. And to those who say that one is more comfortable than the other, that's all relevant to the airline not the aircraft. I recently flew on Delta's new A330neo and it was basically an A330 with some minor differences. The comfort level was the same as their current A330s which are not bad at all. Yet Virgins 787-9 was outrageous in comfort, again all related to the airline's layout, not the aircraft.
The small improvements in the 330 airframe might or might not make a difference, but NEO's Trent 7000 engines are a lot quieter. So, the comfort level can't be exactly the same. Just saying...
@@BrianYYH The A350-1000 yes. The A350-900 looks like a giant bird of prey. I can't be the only one that notices that. IMO the 787 has better proportions.
Well, you can't have everything. If you can make a better plane that only costs slightly more, your previous model will very likely see a drop in sales since psychologically, most customers want the "biggest, baddest, fastest" model you have.
Unless you’re Delta, you’re not seeking to fly the A339 on maximum length missions. The idea is a medium length plane in the 4000-5000 nmi mission and for airlines already operating the A330.
I believe the other reason the A330NEO is selling because a lot of A330CEO's are still running around. I still believe that the A330 airframe is quite incredible, Airbus has improved it incrementally, not to mention it's still an economical aircraft to run, so I believe it still does have some competitive edge to pit it against the the 787. There are many A333's in particular still doing flights for many airlines, a significant amount are still quite young. Obviously you don't want to retire a young fleet early, so the A330NEO's are kept running around for a little longer. Perhaps we can see the A330NEO pick up sales as airlines retire their A330CEO's as the A330NEO is a very viable replacement for the CEO, plus it's cheaper to invest in the A330NEO (training, commonality etc.) if airlines had previously flown the A330CEO. Just because the A330NEO isn't selling well for now does not necessarily mean it won't sell well later on. If you take a look at the 77W for example, in the beginning not a whole lot of sales were made, yet sales started gradually picking up, and is now the best selling 777 variant. In other words, it was a late bloomer. The A330 highly efficient and versatile airframe, and I believe it has potential to be a popular aircraft.
You make a lot of good points, and I agree that things could turn around for the a330neo. Another consideration to take into account is that while there are plenty of a330ceos flying around with no sign of retirement, Airbus likely had to commit to the neo now before the backlog ran dry, even though they knew near-term sales would be less-than stellar. Maintaining that supply cadence is key - the second it shuts down it essentially kills the program (see 757). Thanks for chiming in!
@@michelangelobuonarroti4958 Well, in the sense that 737Max was a plane built by the accountants and CEOs, not by engineers who actually suggested going for a new plane as the 737 was an obsolete platform. With Airbus, we have another scenario, as Airbus is quite famous for scenarios like the 737Max where the computers drove the plane down. Arguably, with Airbus it was bad pilot training to work with the computer, rather than straight out design fuck up, but the ideea still stands. So, trying to say that it's a great ideea to upgrade incrementaly an old a like the OP suggested around the times of 737Max is a really risky statement.
The best thing about the 330 for me is the same as the 340. The seat layout of 2 4 2 makes for much better comfort snd allows the many couples travelling together to sit without a 3rd party next to them.
the 777 still sold better than the A350, even if we exclude the years of its service before the A350 was released. The 787 doesn't really compete with the A350
@@spaceman_spiff2391 True, the A350 supplants the 777 while the 787 does the same for the 767 and to some degree the A330. The 4-year delay was Airbus' typical European arrogance in thinking they didn't need to provide a competitor to the 787. To that I say, without Emirates maybe they wouldn't have been so smug. The A380 program was born out of some inferiority complex. I miss the days of the A300 and the A320, endless innovation and pushing the envelope. Then again, without America, who would Europe angrily resent? Then again - _again_ , without America, Europe would probably be some war-torn ex-soviet state by now...But we all conveniently forget about that, don't we?
There may have some cross over effect there. But the a350 is more of a 777 competitor and doesn’t stack up perfectly when compared head-to-head with the 787. The only place where there might be some overlap is the largest 787 variant (the -10) and the smallest a350 variant (the -900), but even then the range and payload capacity of the a350 is still higher
The A330NEO has engines as good or even slightly better than the 787. The R&R Trent 7000 are an evolution from the Trent 1000 and are newer than the GEnx engines that equip the 787, so that wouldn't be a surprise. Not enough to beat the 787 overall efficiency, but I think it's worth mentioning.
Great Analysis! Spot on! However it is worth noting that the A330neo has a comparable per trip cost to the B787 for mission under 4000NM. This being said it all boils down to the airlines configurations. For extreme ends of the configuration such as premium heavy (1-2-1 business class) routes or high density 9abreast routes the A330neo is able to offer comparable if not better operating cost than the B787. However with typical 2 class layout, the 9 abreast B787 offers lower CASM compared to the 8 abreast A330neo. Therefore it ultimately boils down to which configuration appeals to the airlines more. High density 9abreast configuration most definitely appeals to LCC hence we see a large chunks of the orders coming from LCC most notably AirAsia.
You make a lot of good points! Ultimately it does come down to configuration - if an airline wants to pack the a330neo to max capacity then it'll certainly have a better per-seat fuel burn than a 787 in a 3-class config. However, when looking at what might be considered a "standard" long-haul route in a "standard" configuration, the 787's fuel burn is far superior. I'm really glad you brought this up though because it's got me thinking about making another video about how airlines are the real gatekeepers of airplane efficiency; depending on seat configuration and route choice, certain planes can be more or less efficient than the might initially appear
@@cobyexplanes I agree. When it comes to standard configuration that many airlines uses, the B787 does offer better fuel efficiency. However I will not use the term "far superior" because they aren't really that far apart. As mentioned earlier, both aircraft has similar fuel burn per trip, and the only difference is coming from how the airlines configured their cabins. Mathematically speaking you have the same numerator while the airlines apply in different denominator. I look forward to seeing the video how airlines configured their aircraft effects the aircraft fuel efficiency. This should help educate those airbus and boeing fanboys out there one aircraft isn't far superior to the other. Ultimately the operating cost of the aircraft is controlled by the airline and how they choose to configure their aircraft.
The 787 being wider allows airlines to cram more sits in 9 abreast.But an 8 abreast a330neo is better than a 9 abreast 787 but if some airlines use the 787 in 8 abreast it’s definitely better than an 8 abreast a330neo.
This is fascinating to me. The "best" aircraft is all about the mission airlines use the planes for. Apparently up to about 4,000nm the difference in operating costs is minimal but the longer the flights, eg 10+hours the 787 gains an advantage. Interestingly, the 787 was designed originally to be this amazing 2-3-2 in economy (same as A330's 18 inch seats) until the dollars didn't stack up to airlines. This is when the move came and changed to 3-3-3 with a 17 inch seat ouch - sandwich class long haul! The other little known fact is the 787 is actually 2 ton heavier than the A330neo. The A330neo does compete extremely well in this space with a typical $30 million per unit price advantage!
maybe airlines are used to only Boeing planes for many years and how does Boeing build so many so quickly. Yet they have got all the 737MAX planes in storage areas around the world, also Boeing did not have to get full FAA certification ( that is what I read on various places, What about Boeing making apologies to the relatives of 346 passengers of the Lion Airlines and Ethiopian airlines. Seems very quiet out there, I think Boeing does not care for those relatives, They should get lawyers to sue Boeing for millions of $ dollars; after all, Boeing makes billions of dollars in profits for the shareholders and pay CEO millions in his salary
I hate to break the news to you, but in reality, it was Lion Air's fault. Indonesians final report on the accident, makes Lion Air culpable. It lists many things Lion Air maintenance and their pilots failed to do, that actually provoked the plane into having issues and ultimately crashing. I'm not saying Boeing has no responsibility, based on how its software was designed, however, Boeing has no control over how airlines maintain their airplanes. Again, the Indonesians final report, along with the black boxes that were retrieved, including the maintenance logs, all show that that plane was broken and should not have been put back online to fly. Had Lion Air not shown such complacency, the plane would not have flown until it was properly fixed. So in essence, Boeing technically is not the reason that plane crashed. The reason it crashed, is because it was broken well before MCAS activated. As soon as the pilots reached VR1, the plane showed serious instrument conflicts. The captain chose to keep flying the plane instead of return to the airport. Lion Air has the worst Aviation record of all Airlines, and this just proves how irresponsible they are. What's also interesting, there were 38 civil servants on board, from judges to lawmakers. Coincidence?
@@brkitdwn I wouldn't jump to those conclusions - while the crash was not 100% Boeing's fault (there was some improper handling of the situation by Lion Air by way of maintenance and training cuts), the inherent design flaws of the 737max set the airline up for failure. This entire 737max crisis isn't super cut and dry - blame can't immediately and totally be thrust upon just one party
The A330NEO is not selling because they launched it very late. If they launched the A330NEO before the 787, it would have been more selling than the 787.
Well that's pretty much the argument I made - they were late to the game when it comes to this market segment. That being said the 787 is significantly more efficient, so while the a330neo would be selling better than it currently is, it would not outsell the 787 even if it were released before it
Or too early. Lots of a330 operators are still in the middle of their leases. If they fly them at just medium haul they'd no doubt replace them with the Neo.
@@photopawn37 Not sure if releasing it later would be an option. They couldn't wait much longer before the a330ceo backlog ran dry, which would force them to shut down the production line. And as we saw with the 757 program, once a program is shut down there's really no bringing it back
@@cobyexplanes 757 was the first of its line and beaten off by the a321 as boeing was lazy for a replacement same for 767 which was beaten by a330 and left for dead till the delayed 787 arrived even then a330 was holding ground considering how much older it was yet versatile and cheaper ofc. Neo is if anything a tad too early but the 900 is selling pretty good despite being early to the market like the very pre mature a380. Its the 800 that isn't atm again for early reasons. Once ceos start retiring neo orders will rush in as it maked legitimate sense to upgrade to the already cheaper neo of that a330 and save on major type training costs etc associated with moving to a different airliner fleet.
Weird this video doesn't mention total A330 sales since launch of the 787. It's not as if the A330ceo wasn't pithced against the 787 in the beginning. In fact the A330ceo is still rolling off the line. So funny video but the facts are incomplete...
@@Sepolden well then, the IAG CEO said an A330-200 was cheaper in total costs when compared with a 787 on a trip between Europe and LAX. Capital cost advantage for A332 far outweighed fuel cost advantage of the 788. But then again what does an airline CEO know about airplanes. You seem to know way better...
I am surprised to learn that A350 was larger than 787… I have always thought that they were the same breed and type of aircraft. I'm more surprised ro learn that A330 was the same size as 787 because I have always thought that 787 is somewhat closer to 767 but slightly larger, with A330 being closer to 777.
787-8 is noticeable larger than a 767-300 and slightly larger than a 767-400 but smaller than an A330-200. 787-9 is larger than A330-200 but slightly smaller or larger than an A330-300. 777-200 variations are the larger than all the aircraft above and the A350-900 is larger than every aircraft above it. The 787-10 is larger than the A350-900 but smaller than the A350-1000 and the 777-300ER still holds the crown as the largest twin jet in service.
@@AA-tz2bm that crown will be taken by the 777-9 as largest twin jet when it's taking flights on commercial service, with lufthansa or qatar or emirates as launch customer
Funnily enough, the A330neo is only up to 5% less efficient than the equivilent B787, but it's around 5% more efficiant on short routes up to 6 hours long due to being able to carry more seats, longer wings, updated engines etc.
Neo technically unimpressive - (like Coby said there's a reason its cheaper to buy) Can't see how they will out compete the Dreamliner especially when air transport gets back into the swing of thing in a few years. You'll be talking about a more than 30 year old design which costs 30% (estimate) more than the Dreamliner to operate.
The way I see it is Boeing went for an all new small long range jet, the 787 but for a larger long range jet they chose to refresh an old design, the 777X. Airbus did it the other way around. The smaller jet was refreshed with the A330neo but instead we got a larger all new (and fantastic) A350. To be completely honest the A330neo is very efficient if not at the same level as the 787. But while Airbus and Boeing were pouring billions into the A350 and 787 respectively the A330neo was a stroke of pure genius. The A330neo may come into its own in a few years time as airlines that operate older A330's will start looking to replace them. Common type rating, lower purchase price and shorter wait times will more than make up for a marginal increase in efficiency. I'm speculating now but I think Qantas, Air France and Iberia would be potential contenders for an A330neo order
i'll be honest a330 neo is good but remember not all planes can be as beautiful as the B737-800 i know your going to say it doesn't make any sense were talking about 787 and 330 so here is my answer i love 737 nothing can compare that except 747-8/F
i see what they are doing there, airbus SEES that the a330CEO is already retiring, they know that airlines will replace the a330 with a similar aircraft like the 787 or the 777-200 (777s kinda old so it's not a really good option). 767 is old, 757 is also old, 747-8s too big, 777-300er can compete with a350. Therefore no one is competing with 787, thats why it got so many sales. Airbus is trying to get airlines to replace their already running a330CEOs with a cheaper option compared to the 787s. Since some airlines still have some somewhat new a330CEOs, the a330NEO isn't selling, but the orders for the 787 has already given. The reason why some airlines didn't buy the 787 is that they want a cheaper aircraft option (thats my guess), and the a330Neo is perfect for them.
for those who are crying about "OMG YOU STUPID DOOFUS THE NEWER 777 OR THE 777X WOULD BE A BETTER OPTION IT HAS BETTER FUSALAGE, BIGGER CABIN AND IS MUCH MORE EFFICIENT AND FASTER!!!!111" let me tell you, 777 is *E X P E N S I V E*
Excellent analysis of what makes a good outcome and I agree, the Airbus A330 Neo was a good way to help the airliners and nowadays with the repeated problems plaguing the B787, we can see more A330 being used as the great classic long haul airplane that has not done much errors compared to Boeing's attempt at redoing the B777.
The A330neo wing got rid of any legacy structure from the previous A330/A340 wing that was there to allow the wing to use 2 or 4 engines. Airbus emphasise how the wing is 95% the same to keep the maintenance people happy but there have been some big changes in some parts. The B787-8 is more efficient over long routes because as fuel is burned up the B787 is lighter due to it composite technology than the A330 and so burns less fuel. However the A330 has a higher aspect ratio wing that produces less induced drag when heavily loaded so the A330 is competitive on routes below about 3500NM. The 2/4/2 seating on the A330 is slightly wider than the 3/3/3 seating on the B787 which disadvantages airbus but some carriers have put the a330 into 3/3/3 which produces a 16.5 inch seat with slightly narrower armrests but it makes the a330 unbeatable. It works in SE Asia where the Asian frame is smaller.
You make a good point - ultimately Airlines are the gatekeepers on airplane efficiency based on how they configure their jets and what routes they deploy them on. However, for simplicity's sake, the a330neo can't match the 787's fuel burn on a generic long-haul route and with a "standard" cabin configuration (3-class, 2/4/2 for the neo & 3/3/3/ for the 787)
Plenty of flight profiles the 330neo beats the 787 efficiency. The 330 had a wing decades more efficient than anything Boeing had when it was introduced.
It is strange how when discussing huge amounts of money a million here or there can be ignored. When you compared the cost of the two airliners you said they cost almost exactly the same but one was actually $3.9 million cheaper, an amount that can be easily lost in negotiations.
@@chadwells7562 Appreciate everything is relative but 3.9 million (£ or $) is a difference, any sales would probably be for multiple aircraft so all adds up.
@@send2gl Well the payment terms can always change too so it’s not like we’re talking apples to apples either when we call something “cheaper”. The airlines aren’t paying cash for these planes and are either leasing or financing them, so the manufacturer or financier might extend the maturity of the loan or up the interest rate in exchange for a price concession etc. I wonder if the airplane market is like the car market where the entire point is to sell a loan not a vehicle.
Seems airbus is not so much experimenting with new ideas to make airplanes cheaper. There are presently 1,790 firm orders for all versions of the Airbus A330
The competition between Boeing and Airbus has always fascinated me. Eventually I feel that one will completely stop the other, but I think it's many decade's to come still. I also am keen to see whether or not a 3rd producer will come out and be as competitive as the two giants. Awesome video as always mate 🤘😈🤘
I don’t think either Airbus or Boeing will take over and be the only major manufacturer, there’s just too much demand for one supplier to keep up with. I think it’s much more like a 3rd producer will become prevalent, and I think that producer will be the Chinese government. Definitely worth making a video about!
@@cobyexplanes yes please mate, that would be awesome. I've heard about the Chinese built planes, I can definitely see those becoming a major influence. I doubt in the US market but if their pricing isn't bad, then maybe among the smaller carriers in the west.
@@wwar5237 Well the thing with China is that their current airplanes lag in both efficiency and reliability, which is far from things that can be fixed quickly. However the chinese government has a vested interest in those planes becoming more reliable moving forward, since many of the airlines in China are state-run and since the chinese aviaiton market is booming. While we probably won't see any chinese-built planes flying outside of china soon, you best believe the chinese government is going to pour a ton of resources into them to ensure the planes are competitive in a couple of decades. When that happens that's when Boeing and Airbus really ought to worry. Will definitely do a more in-depth analysis though!
@@cobyexplanes this does make me wonder tho. If my country would be a Chinese buyer. Our state run airline is in massive trouble, been for a long time already and we have lots of history with supporting China and vice versa. I could actually see SAA selling their Boeing and Airbus aircraft for Chinese made ones. The south African government has bailed out SAA so many times already and I don't think they will be able to again, so this might prove a possibility for the future of the airline over here.
The original A330-300 only had a range of 5,400 nautical miles. It's a tribute to Airbus engineers they were able to stretch it to 7,200 nautical miles, which makes it a potential 777-200ER replacement.
@@shahimagesyt You mean 5,000 nautical miles. 🙂 It was intended to replace the A300B4-600 models in regional European service and had enough range to fly from central Europe to US East Coast destinations. Indeed, Aer Lingus used the early A330-300 models on the Shannon/Dublin to New York City/Boston routes.
dont forget that because it is only different in variant from legacy a330, airlines dont have to completely retrain or do recertification of their pilots for the a330neo, which is huge in terms of cost-savings for airlines
Coby, another compelling advantage the A330neo offers to an airline is this: the prospect of having a newer plane much sooner! Since it has newer, more efficient engines, it'll offer much of the fuel economy advantage that the B787 does; it may not be as economical, but if it's 70% or 80% economical as the 787, that's enough. Combine that with the fact that an airline can have an updated, proven airliner years sooner, that'll be enough. While better airframe materials and better aerodynamics will help with fuel economy, much of the fuel economy offered by modern airliners is due to the engines. Since the A330neo has that base covered; since it can place it in fleets years sooner; that makes a compelling case, especially to an airline that needs to modernize ASAP.
airbus is a wise company by not making the initial re-design A330 to become the A350, but instead build it from scratch, while still offer the A330neo but really pay attention for it. Not like Boeing with the Max
I wouldn't really call it "not selling" because this simply re-engined 30 year old aircraft is very popular on the Asian market due to the reputation of the legacy a330. I haven't seen a single rumor about an asian airline ordering a 787. Even the thumbnail itself shows an asian airline.
All those airlines with A330s already, what if Airbus had a scheme to upgrade and revamp existing A330s rather than build brand new ones. Reducing waste and taking inefficient older aircraft out of the sky
The A330neo is a plane made for all or mostly airbus Airlines. Adding Boeing planes to your fleet of airbus is expensive and takes time and planning, so unless the airline is much more efficient, it's just not worth it. So those airlines would have to decide to broaden their fleet by adding the 787, or by having an even worse plane. This would make the hurdle to buy boeing planes in the future much lower, and that's nothing you want as Airbus. The A330neo keeps their best customers happy and while not costing them too much. Pretty good if you ask me.
In the current disastrous commercial aviation environment, I wouldn’t make bets on ANY plane selling or not selling. These are unprecedented times for the industry, with no sure path forward for the airlines nor the airliner manufacturers. No one knows what will happen to this industry 1 to 5 years out.
Perhaps if Boeing had designed a new aircraft instead of revamping the 737’s 1960s design yet again it might still be building them and there might be 338 people still alive... The A330 neo is sold alongside the A350 to cover more markets niches. Not every airline has the same budget just as not every car buyer has the same budget. Your timeline is a little confused. Although it is true that before launching the A350 Airbus miscalculated market expectations by initially announcing a heavily revamped A330 as the aircraft intended to go head-to-head with the B787, that aircraft was not the A330 neo. The A330 neo is no more a ‘Frankenstein’s monster’ than a 747-8; an aircraft that benefits from new technologies designed for a new aircraft. In this case the A330 has tech that has filtered down from the A350 just as the 747-8 has tech from the 787.
the 330neo has new winglets AND has a different (new) wing better than the 330ceo...also much upgraded avionics, fms, and other cockpit magic like FLS GLS ROWROP,,,
Airbus bán được A330-neo trong bối cảnh đơn hàng B787 đang quá tải không khác gì Boeing bán đc B373-max trong bối cảnh A320 cũng đang quá tải đơn hàng và các hãng hàng không phải chờ đợi 1 thời gian quá dài ...... tuy nhiên vẫn không hiểu được, việc thiết kế 1 chiếc B787 nguyên khối rất phức tạp và tốn kém lại khó thay thế sửa chữa, thì đem lại hiệu quả gì hơn so với việc chế tạo A350 được ghép từ nhiều mảnh lại ? vừa dễ sửa chữa thay thế, thậm chí chuyển đổi thành máy bay chở hàng sau nhiều năm phục vụ chở khách ?!!
Who cares how many planes is your competitor selling? What matters is your production capacity vs your sales. If you are maxed out, you are maxed out. If competition sells 10 or 100 more planes, that doesnt change the fact you cant build more.
That is Nonsense. The A330 is very much competitive against the 787, it even beats the 787 on some shorter missions. The 787 is optimised for long haul and ultra long haul, the A330 neo is optimised for mid-haul and 'longish' routes. Tha a330neo is not selling? Ask Delta, Emirates and Air Aisa X. Also: The A330 (ceo) has always been an incremental seller, same for the neo. The a350 is a 777 competitor? Well, not quite. It is actually Positioned between the 787 and 777, with a long haul profile.
Every A330CEO is currently being replaced by 787's. The 787 is far better and more fuel efficient than the A330neo. The A330neo is not selling because its simply not better than the 787.
You seems to not be very neutral in your approach and put more on the spotlight the advantages of the 787 over the a330neo. The 330neo is more than "just" new wings and engines. But a complete new cabin concept design "airspace" new cockpit systems, composite wings etc...
Love the a330neo I don't care if it isn't selling
Same!
If it isn't selling, what' the point?
Airlines simple don't buy them to loose money.
I made a trip last 9dec on it from Luanda to Lisbon TAP. Nothing special.
Small space for people in economy class. I prefer Taag 777-300ER.
Neo only a more silent cabin but more erratic and unconftble feeling in turbulence. Don't forget. I well remember those sreeming engines of 330 Ceo or worst in 340. Then you stop to see and hear the lovely roar and silent GE115B passing over you.
@@antoniosoares2903 Small space is the choice of airliner not airbus.Even that B777-300ER is just a normal plane you cant compare it with A350-900/1000 or A380 in terms of range,efficiency and comfortability.
The comparison between the B787 & the A330NEO fails to take into account what really matter. The well documented production, & safety problems of the B787 are really not resolved. Like the B737MAX Boeing dropped the ball by short changing safety concerns to increase profits. Boeign is playing "russian ruollett" with safety & it's future.
@@antoniosoares2903 TAAG 777-300ER has 9 abreast seat in economy class. However, many other airlines put 10 abreast on their 777-300. 8 Abreast A330 is roomier than 10 abreast 777.
"built on an airframe from 90s"
*737 max has left the chat*
mipmip 737 account is blocked
Built on an airframe from the 60s lol
It's still made money though🤑
@@martin.B777 what do you mean the 737 max is grounded lol.
777 was originally was built in the 90's yet 777x is essentially re-engine and new wingtip of 777 90's airframe design
Even if A330Neo does not sell a single unit, it is still a win for Airbus, because it is killing 787 price.
Hakan Evin that doesn’t really make sense man. Anyways I think it’s selling ok, but without going outside Airbus here the first gen A330’s are still being sold and A350s would hamper these newer A330 sales also
@@robbieshaft Check Hawaiian Airlines case, just a single example how Airbus used A330Neo to cut Boeing's profit by minimum $200M in a single project:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_Airlines#Boeing_787-9
And this is not the only example. 787 is like a toast squeezed between A330Neo by price from below and A350 by technology/quality from above. 787 may never break even with this competition. As you know its development costs were huge and costs are still mostly there even after 10 years of production.
@@robbieshaft If being is making less money, they have less money for research. Lack of research means sub-par planes in the future for arbus to compete with.
@@user-yt198 The problem with Boeing is, that their mentality is, that they are far superior to everyone else in the industry. Which 2 of their latest planes the 737 Max and 787 Dreamliner have shown. Both planes were rushed to market, with the 787 having major issues, that were costly to repair after delivery, and the 737 so flawed, that it should never have been build (even considering the potential orders dangeling in front of Beoing CEOs.
Simon Lyngbo regarding the 787, the battery issues are long fixed now and it’s outselling A330N, 737 is a problem too obviously but for different reasons, this was always gonna effect the company as a whole
To be fair, despite the A330neo being a bit less successful at being a popular jet, it still sells well.
Many operators from the A330 don’t want to over spend for the A350, this jet kind slip in the middle but still do the work and still successful for the operators.
The media: ThE 737 iS aN oLd DeSigN
Also the media: The A330neo is brand new!
Hum... its right, 737s are flying since 1967 when a330s are flying since 1992 so....
One can pass certification today and the other flys only thanks to a grandfathered certification from the 60's ...
Despite the MAX having a more modern airframe, the 737 is still an old design with cables running along the frame to operate the aerodynamic surfaces. It is an old concept. There's now way around it.
The A330 is a fully Fly-by-wire aircraft, so it means it benefits from all the current computer and software technology. I wouldn't be surprised to find out the A330NEO cockpit to be in many aspects, more modern than the 787.
temossemi
Well, I don’t believe they really have to fix the MAX.
They only needed to train the pilots on this new variant.
Training pilots = new type rate certification = more
downtime and costs for the clients.
...that was the reason for MCAS implementation.
Which is not an excuse for the awful implementation job they did in the MAX.
The difference is: if you Took away both aircraft's certifications, the neo could be re-certified today as a new plane. The 737 could not.
Thanks Coby ' Now My Brain Is Spinning .
So wait - I always thought that the A350 would be the main competitor to the 787? And what exactly would be a reason for an airline to take the A330neo instead of the A350?
The a350 is larger than the 787
Yannick - The A350 competes more against the 777. That said, I’m surprised at how many seats can be fitted in an A350-900 in 3 classes. The A350-1000 is the same length as the Boeing 777-300(ER) but much lighter.
But the Philippine low-cost carrier Cebu Pacific had ordered 16 Airbus A330NEO's.
Answer is simple. Because is safer than any new Boeing
Sales dismal at best...throw out the bogus Iran air order... which will probably never happen.....and a whopping 250 units sold.... slapping on a dreamliner engine .. hardly matters much..
Comparison would have been fair if 787 vs 350 or 777x vs 330neo
The 777x and a330neo are in two completely different classes. A misconception is that the 787 is a better comparison to the a350 because they are both new and use composites, but the a350 is quite a bit larger than the 787
@@cobyexplanes I agree. I've seen the 787 and A350 comparison a lot. But they're in different classes.
More like a330neo-dreamliner
The A330 Neo has sold 104 units in 2019 meaning it has outsold the 787 by a decent amount. Not bad for a plane which is not selling.
Like he said, waiting 6yrs for your plane doesnt suit everyone.
Victim of their own success
NoYourself one year wow Yeah that’s reason to celebrate
The author of this video and many others missed that the neo is just a "new engine option" of the A330 and the A330 ceo+neo outsold the 787 since 2014.
MHalblaub yeah and he said 330neo wasn’t selling he didn’t say that about 330ceo
Above all: A-330neo is unlikely to require all-new pilot training and type-certification....
I'm sorry but that dash between the A and the 330 triggers me
Good point, training cost is big factor for airline when choosing it fleet
Plus, the 787's systems are very complex and spare parts mostly have to be bought new, whereas an A330 is much simpler and there is a big 2nd hand market for parts.
@@fartingfury I heard though that the 787's adoptation of a more electric architecture helps simplify some of its systems e.g. undercarriage wiring & piping
@@lzh4950 Well, for example there's no pneumatic (compressed air) system on the 787, so for sure that's much simpler. But there's a catch: Any system that would have run from compressed air on other aircraft (notably the air conditioning) now has to run on electricity, which means a heavier and more complex electrical network, and an entirely new air conditioning system (that the mechanics are not familiar with, that can only be repaired in a limited number of places and which is probably heavier). An airline might decide the trade-off is worth it (getting electricity from the engines is much more efficient than taking compressed air from them) but it introduces new complexities (even while eliminating some old ones).
But I was mostly referring to the computers controlling all the systems - I've been told (but cannot confirm) that they're a bit of a pain to deal with. And I saw the wiring of an earlier aircraft's avionic bay : I personally found it extremely untidy and disorganised...
“Built on an airframe from the 90s”
*Cries in 777x*
*cries even harder in 737 max*
737max airframe is from the 60s
cries in a320 neo
*Cries in 777X BBJ*
SlovesL 777x actually has a new and larger body than the original 777
The dreamliner is a more economical plane, but man the 2-4-2 config on the a330 is so nice.
Eli_2020 couple seats are at the rear!
Anh Quan Chu yeah but then there’s usually only two pairs in the entire plane, not everyone wants to sit all the way at the back and most airlines now charge for seat selection
fly jal b787 , it 2-4-2
A330's 2-4-2 is my preferred seating. Also, the 787 is only a few inches wider than the A330, so the 787 seats are a bit narrower.
It's good for families traveling
The A330 neo has sold around 70 units this year outselling the 787. I wouldn’t write it off as a failure just yet.
Hmmm im pretty sure more 787s have been sold in 2019.
@@shahimagesyt As of November 787 has 84 orders and 27 cancellations (Net 57), Airbus has 64 orders and 3 cancellations (Net 61) plus 5 more CEO cancellations
According to Wikipedia, there were 84 total orders for the 787 in 2019.
@@DorianTMChannel The moment you mentioned Wikipedia, you know you can't trust the figure lol
@@Oepheus are you a teacher? lol i'll try and find a better source
As they say, in 3-8 years time, as a good chunk of A330CEO's begin to show their age, I feel like the neo's sales will pick up at a decent pace.
The A330 is an economic machine in sub 4000mile routes and it's way more comfortable for the folks in economy vs 787. Which would you rather cross the Atlantic in?
In fairness, the B78X (Boeing 787-10 Dreamliner) has closed the gap as that’s only a 6000 nmi plane (also to protect the 777).
Well, before everyone gets a little too crazy into the A330neo being a smashing success, one needs to understand that the A330neo role isn't to be the comparison to the 787-9 as many are making it to be. The purpose that the A330neo serves are quite simple. The first is to act in the same manner as the 747-8 did to the A380. While 747-8 was essentially a revamp of the 747-400, it still had enough upgrades to allow it to be somewhat competitive against the A380 without Boeing having to swallow the high costs of creating an all new design. While widebody twins killed the A380, the 747-8 did chip some ice off the iceberg and most certainly killed the A380's chances as a freighter. The A330-900neo allows Airbus to chip away at the competitor sales of the 787 without breaking the bank.
Which brings to the 2nd reason. The 787-9 may be too much aircraft for some airlines, and price most certainly can be prohibitive for others, so by offering an aircraft with a much lower purchasing cost than the new 787, and add excellent economics combined with an already successful platform, you then are offering a product that can be very attractive to those airlines looking for something a little cheaper. That being said, the A350 is also too much airplane as well for some airlines and it's not by accident that operators who looked at the A350 have either revamped their orders to include the A330neo or out right changed it and eliminated the A350 in favor of the A330neo. It gives Airbus flexibility and also options to sell both airplanes as a package deal to airlines with commonality as a key selling point.
Third- The A330neo allows Airbus to maximize the A330 production line, allowing it to remain open, and to buy Airbus time to create a replacement for this segment which it will eventually have to do. It is the same concept as with Boeing and the 737Max and with Airbus A320neo. Take an already successful product, add improvements to it that will increase the economics of the plane without having to spend high amounts of money on development costs. What's not smart about that? It's very obvious that neither manufacturer are warm and fuzzy about creating an all new design at this time. It can be for various reasons, but my guess is that it may be related to the issues that are plaguing the engine manufacturers as they seem to all be having problems. And that too may tie into the fact that Airbus and Boeing may be waiting a bit to allow for technology to catch up with what Airlines are demanding. But the A330neo isn't killing the sales of the 787. The 787 will continue to be improved as the design matures like any other aircraft and the A330neo will be obsolete eventually. that's just the cycle of aircraft design.
And to those who say that one is more comfortable than the other, that's all relevant to the airline not the aircraft. I recently flew on Delta's new A330neo and it was basically an A330 with some minor differences. The comfort level was the same as their current A330s which are not bad at all. Yet Virgins 787-9 was outrageous in comfort, again all related to the airline's layout, not the aircraft.
The small improvements in the 330 airframe might or might not make a difference, but NEO's Trent 7000 engines are a lot quieter. So, the comfort level can't be exactly the same. Just saying...
This answer is better than the video
TL:DR
Please explain what you mean by "too much airplane ".
Please, it will fail just as hard as the A380 did. Airbus have lost their edge.
A330 Neo is selling pretty well I would say.
Pajtim Pachuku Yeah but they still didn’t sell more than the 787 in 2019
red ryder just because you didn’t sell more than the 787 doesn’t make it a failure you walnut
@@redryder1146 still, they made huge profit just from 2019 considering it's development cost
best commercial airliner on the market right now: a350
You’re welcome to your opinion
red ryder DC-3 amirite lads lol
Ignored Advice Productions The ju-87 is superior.
agreed
787 is better
I always thought the engine and body proportions of the A330 looked weird. The A330neo definitely changed that for the better!
IMO the A330 was the sexiest airframe ever built.
@@michlo3393 I think I’d give that title to the A350. If only it had windows as big as the A220...
@@BrianYYH The A350-1000 yes. The A350-900 looks like a giant bird of prey. I can't be the only one that notices that. IMO the 787 has better proportions.
End of 2021: the A330 neo has sold more than the B777X.
Boeing 787 has many problems and his production is off for the moment.
the reason is not selling is that the a330-ceo is too damm good
It might sell like the 787 if the A330-CEO owners retire them.
Well, you can't have everything. If you can make a better plane that only costs slightly more, your previous model will very likely see a drop in sales since psychologically, most customers want the "biggest, baddest, fastest" model you have.
Unless you’re Delta, you’re not seeking to fly the A339 on maximum length missions. The idea is a medium length plane in the 4000-5000 nmi mission and for airlines already operating the A330.
I believe the other reason the A330NEO is selling because a lot of A330CEO's are still running around. I still believe that the A330 airframe is quite incredible, Airbus has improved it incrementally, not to mention it's still an economical aircraft to run, so I believe it still does have some competitive edge to pit it against the the 787. There are many A333's in particular still doing flights for many airlines, a significant amount are still quite young. Obviously you don't want to retire a young fleet early, so the A330NEO's are kept running around for a little longer. Perhaps we can see the A330NEO pick up sales as airlines retire their A330CEO's as the A330NEO is a very viable replacement for the CEO, plus it's cheaper to invest in the A330NEO (training, commonality etc.) if airlines had previously flown the A330CEO. Just because the A330NEO isn't selling well for now does not necessarily mean it won't sell well later on. If you take a look at the 77W for example, in the beginning not a whole lot of sales were made, yet sales started gradually picking up, and is now the best selling 777 variant. In other words, it was a late bloomer. The A330 highly efficient and versatile airframe, and I believe it has potential to be a popular aircraft.
You make a lot of good points, and I agree that things could turn around for the a330neo. Another consideration to take into account is that while there are plenty of a330ceos flying around with no sign of retirement, Airbus likely had to commit to the neo now before the backlog ran dry, even though they knew near-term sales would be less-than stellar. Maintaining that supply cadence is key - the second it shuts down it essentially kills the program (see 757). Thanks for chiming in!
Let's just hope it won't turn into another 737 debacle
It is a really good plane to have until airbus develops an actually new plane for this range/capacity.
@@nottoday3817 in what sense
@@michelangelobuonarroti4958 Well, in the sense that 737Max was a plane built by the accountants and CEOs, not by engineers who actually suggested going for a new plane as the 737 was an obsolete platform. With Airbus, we have another scenario, as Airbus is quite famous for scenarios like the 737Max where the computers drove the plane down. Arguably, with Airbus it was bad pilot training to work with the computer, rather than straight out design fuck up, but the ideea still stands. So, trying to say that it's a great ideea to upgrade incrementaly an old a like the OP suggested around the times of 737Max is a really risky statement.
The best thing about the 330 for me is the same as the 340. The seat layout of 2 4 2 makes for much better comfort snd allows the many couples travelling together to sit without a 3rd party next to them.
Don’t forget the A350 has sold almost 1000 units despite being introduced 4 years later than the 787
the 777 still sold better than the A350, even if we exclude the years of its service before the A350 was released. The 787 doesn't really compete with the A350
I'm sure Boeing's marketing department loses sleep several times a month knowing that...
When will people understand that the A350 and the 787 aren't direct competitors
@@spaceman_spiff2391 True, the A350 supplants the 777 while the 787 does the same for the 767 and to some degree the A330. The 4-year delay was Airbus' typical European arrogance in thinking they didn't need to provide a competitor to the 787. To that I say, without Emirates maybe they wouldn't have been so smug. The A380 program was born out of some inferiority complex. I miss the days of the A300 and the A320, endless innovation and pushing the envelope. Then again, without America, who would Europe angrily resent? Then again - _again_ , without America, Europe would probably be some war-torn ex-soviet state by now...But we all conveniently forget about that, don't we?
@@michlo3393 Why do you consider airbus to be arrogant? I'm curious
I think a350 impacted Dreamliner's sales since 2014 launch
There may have some cross over effect there. But the a350 is more of a 777 competitor and doesn’t stack up perfectly when compared head-to-head with the 787. The only place where there might be some overlap is the largest 787 variant (the -10) and the smallest a350 variant (the -900), but even then the range and payload capacity of the a350 is still higher
Ik the 787 and A350 r nice and all but all of us agree that there will be never an aircraft like the 747
I’m so glad I found this channel!
I'm glad you did too, welcome :)
You put out a lot of Boeing videos, it's nice to see you mixing it up these past couple of weeks :)
Not intentionally but ya I was putting out a lot of Boeing videos now that I think of it 😅
Coby Explanes It’s unfair to Airbus fans showing all Boeing’s 🇬🇧🇺🇸❤️✈️😥✈️
The A330NEO has engines as good or even slightly better than the 787.
The R&R Trent 7000 are an evolution from the Trent 1000 and are newer than the GEnx engines that equip the 787, so that wouldn't be a surprise. Not enough to beat the 787 overall efficiency, but I think it's worth mentioning.
Great Analysis! Spot on!
However it is worth noting that the A330neo has a comparable per trip cost to the B787 for mission under 4000NM. This being said it all boils down to the airlines configurations. For extreme ends of the configuration such as premium heavy (1-2-1 business class) routes or high density 9abreast routes the A330neo is able to offer comparable if not better operating cost than the B787. However with typical 2 class layout, the 9 abreast B787 offers lower CASM compared to the 8 abreast A330neo. Therefore it ultimately boils down to which configuration appeals to the airlines more. High density 9abreast configuration most definitely appeals to LCC hence we see a large chunks of the orders coming from LCC most notably AirAsia.
You make a lot of good points! Ultimately it does come down to configuration - if an airline wants to pack the a330neo to max capacity then it'll certainly have a better per-seat fuel burn than a 787 in a 3-class config. However, when looking at what might be considered a "standard" long-haul route in a "standard" configuration, the 787's fuel burn is far superior.
I'm really glad you brought this up though because it's got me thinking about making another video about how airlines are the real gatekeepers of airplane efficiency; depending on seat configuration and route choice, certain planes can be more or less efficient than the might initially appear
@@cobyexplanes I agree. When it comes to standard configuration that many airlines uses, the B787 does offer better fuel efficiency. However I will not use the term "far superior" because they aren't really that far apart. As mentioned earlier, both aircraft has similar fuel burn per trip, and the only difference is coming from how the airlines configured their cabins. Mathematically speaking you have the same numerator while the airlines apply in different denominator.
I look forward to seeing the video how airlines configured their aircraft effects the aircraft fuel efficiency. This should help educate those airbus and boeing fanboys out there one aircraft isn't far superior to the other. Ultimately the operating cost of the aircraft is controlled by the airline and how they choose to configure their aircraft.
The 787 being wider allows airlines to cram more sits in 9 abreast.But an 8 abreast a330neo is better than a 9 abreast 787 but if some airlines use the 787 in 8 abreast it’s definitely better than an 8 abreast a330neo.
Not to mention airbus is getting a lot of sales on the a350
This is fascinating to me. The "best" aircraft is all about the mission airlines use the planes for. Apparently up to about 4,000nm the difference in operating costs is minimal but the longer the flights, eg 10+hours the 787 gains an advantage. Interestingly, the 787 was designed originally to be this amazing 2-3-2 in economy (same as A330's 18 inch seats) until the dollars didn't stack up to airlines. This is when the move came and changed to 3-3-3 with a 17 inch seat ouch - sandwich class long haul! The other little known fact is the 787 is actually 2 ton heavier than the A330neo. The A330neo does compete extremely well in this space with a typical $30 million per unit price advantage!
The Neo was genius since it saved money both to Airbus and its customers.
maybe airlines are used to only Boeing planes for many years and how does Boeing build so many so quickly. Yet they have got all the 737MAX planes in storage areas around the world, also Boeing did not have to get full FAA certification ( that is what I read on various places, What about Boeing making apologies to the relatives of 346 passengers of the Lion Airlines and Ethiopian airlines. Seems very quiet out there, I think Boeing does not care for those relatives, They should get lawyers to sue Boeing for millions of $ dollars; after all, Boeing makes billions of dollars in profits for the shareholders and pay CEO millions in his salary
They build so many so quickly because they have to. Demand for planes is high, # of airplane manufacturers is small. Simple as that.
I hate to break the news to you, but in reality, it was Lion Air's fault. Indonesians final report on the accident, makes Lion Air culpable. It lists many things Lion Air maintenance and their pilots failed to do, that actually provoked the plane into having issues and ultimately crashing. I'm not saying Boeing has no responsibility, based on how its software was designed, however, Boeing has no control over how airlines maintain their airplanes. Again, the Indonesians final report, along with the black boxes that were retrieved, including the maintenance logs, all show that that plane was broken and should not have been put back online to fly. Had Lion Air not shown such complacency, the plane would not have flown until it was properly fixed. So in essence, Boeing technically is not the reason that plane crashed. The reason it crashed, is because it was broken well before MCAS activated. As soon as the pilots reached VR1, the plane showed serious instrument conflicts. The captain chose to keep flying the plane instead of return to the airport. Lion Air has the worst Aviation record of all Airlines, and this just proves how irresponsible they are. What's also interesting, there were 38 civil servants on board, from judges to lawmakers. Coincidence?
@@brkitdwn I wouldn't jump to those conclusions - while the crash was not 100% Boeing's fault (there was some improper handling of the situation by Lion Air by way of maintenance and training cuts), the inherent design flaws of the 737max set the airline up for failure. This entire 737max crisis isn't super cut and dry - blame can't immediately and totally be thrust upon just one party
So what?
@@alphamalegold so right! The flaw Design of the Max came first
The A330NEO is not selling because they launched it very late. If they launched the A330NEO before the 787, it would have been more selling than the 787.
Well that's pretty much the argument I made - they were late to the game when it comes to this market segment. That being said the 787 is significantly more efficient, so while the a330neo would be selling better than it currently is, it would not outsell the 787 even if it were released before it
Or too early. Lots of a330 operators are still in the middle of their leases. If they fly them at just medium haul they'd no doubt replace them with the Neo.
@@photopawn37 Not sure if releasing it later would be an option. They couldn't wait much longer before the a330ceo backlog ran dry, which would force them to shut down the production line. And as we saw with the 757 program, once a program is shut down there's really no bringing it back
@@cobyexplanes 757 was the first of its line and beaten off by the a321 as boeing was lazy for a replacement same for 767 which was beaten by a330 and left for dead till the delayed 787 arrived even then a330 was holding ground considering how much older it was yet versatile and cheaper ofc. Neo is if anything a tad too early but the 900 is selling pretty good despite being early to the market like the very pre mature a380. Its the 800 that isn't atm again for early reasons. Once ceos start retiring neo orders will rush in as it maked legitimate sense to upgrade to the already cheaper neo of that a330 and save on major type training costs etc associated with moving to a different airliner fleet.
Ahhh.... nope
Airbus is a marketing and sales powerhouse, they know what they are doing.
Band Scores Galore cries in A380
Active Ayaan *Screams in 737 Max*
@@Alboravin Sink rate Sink rate Pull up Pull up Pull up ....…......
A lot of the sales growths and successes sure has been contributed by John Leahy, previous sales exec of Airbus.
Clever move by Airbus. I think the A330 NEO looks great.
Weird this video doesn't mention total A330 sales since launch of the 787. It's not as if the A330ceo wasn't pithced against the 787 in the beginning. In fact the A330ceo is still rolling off the line. So funny video but the facts are incomplete...
That-s right, this video is a fiasco.
Ok are you SEROUSLY saying the A330 is as good as a 787???
@@Sepolden It obviously is... sales since 787 launch are almost equal!
Jermaine Ravenberg yep, and in 2018 the Boeing 737 Max destroyed A320 Neo sales. ITS ABOUT COST.
@@Sepolden well then, the IAG CEO said an A330-200 was cheaper in total costs when compared with a 787 on a trip between Europe and LAX. Capital cost advantage for A332 far outweighed fuel cost advantage of the 788. But then again what does an airline CEO know about airplanes. You seem to know way better...
Errrrrrrmmmmm..... I'd say that well over 370 orders and deliveries to isn't that bad, would you????
This shows up when 40 orders on this plane are made official...
Meanwhile Boeing drops production of the 787 to 10 per month 🤷🏻♂️
I am surprised to learn that A350 was larger than 787… I have always thought that they were the same breed and type of aircraft. I'm more surprised ro learn that A330 was the same size as 787 because I have always thought that 787 is somewhat closer to 767 but slightly larger, with A330 being closer to 777.
A350-900 is like a 777-200. A350-1000 is like a 777-300.
787-8 is noticeable larger than a 767-300 and slightly larger than a 767-400 but smaller than an A330-200.
787-9 is larger than A330-200 but slightly smaller or larger than an A330-300. 777-200 variations are the larger than all the aircraft above and the A350-900 is larger than every aircraft above it. The 787-10 is larger than the A350-900 but smaller than the A350-1000 and the 777-300ER still holds the crown as the largest twin jet in service.
@@AA-tz2bm that crown will be taken by the 777-9 as largest twin jet when it's taking flights on commercial service, with lufthansa or qatar or emirates as launch customer
@@stoje8405 ye
Yeah, me to
Funnily enough, the A330neo is only up to 5% less efficient than the equivilent B787, but it's around 5% more efficiant on short routes up to 6 hours long due to being able to carry more seats, longer wings, updated engines etc.
I’m a Boeing fanboy but the A330 neo looks beautiful
Who love Airbus? I love🥰.....
Neo technically unimpressive - (like Coby said there's a reason its cheaper to buy) Can't see how they will out compete the Dreamliner especially when air transport gets back into the swing of thing in a few years. You'll be talking about a more than 30 year old design which costs 30% (estimate) more than the Dreamliner to operate.
The way I see it is Boeing went for an all new small long range jet, the 787 but for a larger long range jet they chose to refresh an old design, the 777X. Airbus did it the other way around. The smaller jet was refreshed with the A330neo but instead we got a larger all new (and fantastic) A350.
To be completely honest the A330neo is very efficient if not at the same level as the 787. But while Airbus and Boeing were pouring billions into the A350 and 787 respectively the A330neo was a stroke of pure genius. The A330neo may come into its own in a few years time as airlines that operate older A330's will start looking to replace them. Common type rating, lower purchase price and shorter wait times will more than make up for a marginal increase in efficiency. I'm speculating now but I think Qantas, Air France and Iberia would be potential contenders for an A330neo order
The A330 is an affordable option in lieu of the 787 or A350. And a damn fine airframe to boot.
i'll be honest a330 neo is good but remember not all planes can be as beautiful as the B737-800 i know your going to say it doesn't make any sense were talking about 787 and 330 so here is my answer
i love 737 nothing can compare that except 747-8/F
i see what they are doing there, airbus SEES that the a330CEO is already retiring, they know that airlines will replace the a330 with a similar aircraft like the 787 or the 777-200 (777s kinda old so it's not a really good option). 767 is old, 757 is also old, 747-8s too big, 777-300er can compete with a350. Therefore no one is competing with 787, thats why it got so many sales. Airbus is trying to get airlines to replace their already running a330CEOs with a cheaper option compared to the 787s. Since some airlines still have some somewhat new a330CEOs, the a330NEO isn't selling, but the orders for the 787 has already given. The reason why some airlines didn't buy the 787 is that they want a cheaper aircraft option (thats my guess), and the a330Neo is perfect for them.
for those who are crying about "OMG YOU STUPID DOOFUS THE NEWER 777 OR THE 777X WOULD BE A BETTER OPTION IT HAS BETTER FUSALAGE, BIGGER CABIN AND IS MUCH MORE EFFICIENT AND FASTER!!!!111" let me tell you, 777 is *E X P E N S I V E*
Excellent analysis of what makes a good outcome and I agree, the Airbus A330 Neo was a good way to help the airliners and nowadays with the repeated problems plaguing the B787, we can see more A330 being used as the great classic long haul airplane that has not done much errors compared to Boeing's attempt at redoing the B777.
The A330neo wing got rid of any legacy structure from the previous A330/A340 wing that was there to allow the wing to use 2 or 4 engines. Airbus emphasise how the wing is 95% the same to keep the maintenance people happy but there have been some big changes in some parts. The B787-8 is more efficient over long routes because as fuel is burned up the B787 is lighter due to it composite technology than the A330 and so burns less fuel. However the A330 has a higher aspect ratio wing that produces less induced drag when heavily loaded so the A330 is competitive on routes below about 3500NM. The 2/4/2 seating on the A330 is slightly wider than the 3/3/3 seating on the B787 which disadvantages airbus but some carriers have put the a330 into 3/3/3 which produces a 16.5 inch seat with slightly narrower armrests but it makes the a330 unbeatable. It works in SE Asia where the Asian frame is smaller.
a 3/3/3 a330 sounds like my worst nightmare. a 2/4/2 is already tight enough as is
You make a good point - ultimately Airlines are the gatekeepers on airplane efficiency based on how they configure their jets and what routes they deploy them on. However, for simplicity's sake, the a330neo can't match the 787's fuel burn on a generic long-haul route and with a "standard" cabin configuration (3-class, 2/4/2 for the neo & 3/3/3/ for the 787)
Plenty of flight profiles the 330neo beats the 787 efficiency. The 330 had a wing decades more efficient than anything Boeing had when it was introduced.
keep dreaming euro butt boy
Lol, you must be joking. I hope so anyways .
Airbus planes have sharklets. Not winglets
It is strange how when discussing huge amounts of money a million here or there can be ignored. When you compared the cost of the two airliners you said they cost almost exactly the same but one was actually $3.9 million cheaper, an amount that can be easily lost in negotiations.
Ya it is definitely crazy, when you’re talking about multi billion dollar deals a few million here or there is easily lost
Not that strange, it’s all relative to the scale of the operation being discussed.
@@chadwells7562 Appreciate everything is relative but 3.9 million (£ or $) is a difference, any sales would probably be for multiple aircraft so all adds up.
@@send2gl Well the payment terms can always change too so it’s not like we’re talking apples to apples either when we call something “cheaper”. The airlines aren’t paying cash for these planes and are either leasing or financing them, so the manufacturer or financier might extend the maturity of the loan or up the interest rate in exchange for a price concession etc. I wonder if the airplane market is like the car market where the entire point is to sell a loan not a vehicle.
WoW, Beautiful beast ♥️ 1:35
Don't blame Airbus to revamp one of their successful models when Boeing does pretty much the same with it's 737 Max
but not with such success :(
@@webjunkiesnoopy120 For either companies.
@@nomebear At least A330neo is not grounded.
@@webjunkiesnoopy120 737 airframe is older than a huge majority of us
even the 777x is in some kind a rewamp not really selling well...
It made boing ruin their own reputation with the max
Ur a airbus fan boy From all ur videos
haha I like this, I got about an equal amount of people telling me I'm an Airbus fanboy as I am a Boeing fanboy. Why can't I like both? :)
Seems airbus is not so much experimenting with new ideas to make airplanes cheaper. There are presently 1,790 firm orders for all versions of the Airbus A330
Too bad Hawaiian Airlines cancel A-330neo orders. I think American Airlines could order A-330neo to replace the A-330s and B777-200s.
American already has too many 787's on order (nearly 50 I think) to justify placing an order for the neo. Would be cool to see, though
Coby Explanes That’s true 😊
The competition between Boeing and Airbus has always fascinated me. Eventually I feel that one will completely stop the other, but I think it's many decade's to come still.
I also am keen to see whether or not a 3rd producer will come out and be as competitive as the two giants.
Awesome video as always mate
🤘😈🤘
I don’t think either Airbus or Boeing will take over and be the only major manufacturer, there’s just too much demand for one supplier to keep up with. I think it’s much more like a 3rd producer will become prevalent, and I think that producer will be the Chinese government. Definitely worth making a video about!
@@cobyexplanes yes please mate, that would be awesome. I've heard about the Chinese built planes, I can definitely see those becoming a major influence. I doubt in the US market but if their pricing isn't bad, then maybe among the smaller carriers in the west.
@@wwar5237 Well the thing with China is that their current airplanes lag in both efficiency and reliability, which is far from things that can be fixed quickly. However the chinese government has a vested interest in those planes becoming more reliable moving forward, since many of the airlines in China are state-run and since the chinese aviaiton market is booming. While we probably won't see any chinese-built planes flying outside of china soon, you best believe the chinese government is going to pour a ton of resources into them to ensure the planes are competitive in a couple of decades. When that happens that's when Boeing and Airbus really ought to worry. Will definitely do a more in-depth analysis though!
@@cobyexplanes this does make me wonder tho. If my country would be a Chinese buyer.
Our state run airline is in massive trouble, been for a long time already and we have lots of history with supporting China and vice versa. I could actually see SAA selling their Boeing and Airbus aircraft for Chinese made ones.
The south African government has bailed out SAA so many times already and I don't think they will be able to again, so this might prove a possibility for the future of the airline over here.
@ger du You speak too soon. 737 MAX back in the picture and it's a nice aircraft to be sure.
Don't forget it also got the raccoon mask.
The A330 is way more reliable than the 787 and its built by european workers, that is a bigly plus.
The original A330-300 only had a range of 5,400 nautical miles. It's a tribute to Airbus engineers they were able to stretch it to 7,200 nautical miles, which makes it a potential 777-200ER replacement.
Michael Fiedler European and American cars and planes sucks 😂😂 the Japanese should take over the plane market just like they did with cars
Ricardo Correa so what you’re saying is nearly every plane in the sky sucks and most cars on the road suck? Ok 😃
@@Sacto1654 well according to google, it had 500 nmi of range.
@@shahimagesyt You mean 5,000 nautical miles. 🙂 It was intended to replace the A300B4-600 models in regional European service and had enough range to fly from central Europe to US East Coast destinations. Indeed, Aer Lingus used the early A330-300 models on the Shannon/Dublin to New York City/Boston routes.
dont forget that because it is only different in variant from legacy a330, airlines dont have to completely retrain or do recertification of their pilots for the a330neo, which is huge in terms of cost-savings for airlines
I love when Airbus succeeds
Airbus took their time to build a safe and efficient plane... Boeing thought about ..... well they built the most expensive coffins!
Coby, another compelling advantage the A330neo offers to an airline is this: the prospect of having a newer plane much sooner! Since it has newer, more efficient engines, it'll offer much of the fuel economy advantage that the B787 does; it may not be as economical, but if it's 70% or 80% economical as the 787, that's enough. Combine that with the fact that an airline can have an updated, proven airliner years sooner, that'll be enough. While better airframe materials and better aerodynamics will help with fuel economy, much of the fuel economy offered by modern airliners is due to the engines. Since the A330neo has that base covered; since it can place it in fleets years sooner; that makes a compelling case, especially to an airline that needs to modernize ASAP.
The 330 ist the most comfortable airliner on the market. I mean for economy travellers. It's the only one plane left wit 2-4-2 seating.
the a330 is good but the a330neo is the worst
airbus is a wise company by not making the initial re-design A330 to become the A350, but instead build it from scratch, while still offer the A330neo but really pay attention for it. Not like Boeing with the Max
It's not true that the A330 Neo is not selling, it's now selling quite well after a slow start !
Boeing: Releases B777X to airlines
Airbus: Hold my beer
More like: Hold my wine and chocolate cigarette.
I wouldn't really call it "not selling" because this simply re-engined 30 year old aircraft is very popular on the Asian market due to the reputation of the legacy a330. I haven't seen a single rumor about an asian airline ordering a 787. Even the thumbnail itself shows an asian airline.
All those airlines with A330s already, what if Airbus had a scheme to upgrade and revamp existing A330s rather than build brand new ones. Reducing waste and taking inefficient older aircraft out of the sky
So the 787 cost more to develop than the A380? WOW!
probably because making a fuselage out of carbon composites was a brand new thing
The A330neo is a plane made for all or mostly airbus Airlines. Adding Boeing planes to your fleet of airbus is expensive and takes time and planning, so unless the airline is much more efficient, it's just not worth it. So those airlines would have to decide to broaden their fleet by adding the 787, or by having an even worse plane. This would make the hurdle to buy boeing planes in the future much lower, and that's nothing you want as Airbus.
The A330neo keeps their best customers happy and while not costing them too much. Pretty good if you ask me.
Watching it now after Cathay announcing 30+30 order for A330-900, yeah it's finally selling
Ha ha ha so "bias".
your videos are so informative and easy to take in, great work:) subscribed and looking forward to new uploads!!
Welcome aboard :)
I smell a bias opinion here towards Boeing hence all the hate on airbus
maybe go back and check out the video at 4:25 - sure doesn't sound like Airbus hate to me haha
Love them both I love the A330-900 neo and the 787-9 Dreamliner
In the current disastrous commercial aviation environment, I wouldn’t make bets on ANY plane selling or not selling. These are unprecedented times for the industry, with no sure path forward for the airlines nor the airliner manufacturers. No one knows what will happen to this industry 1 to 5 years out.
Perhaps if Boeing had designed a new aircraft instead of revamping the 737’s 1960s design yet again it might still be building them and there might be 338 people still alive...
The A330 neo is sold alongside the A350 to cover more markets niches. Not every airline has the same budget just as not every car buyer has the same budget.
Your timeline is a little confused.
Although it is true that before launching the A350 Airbus miscalculated market expectations by initially announcing a heavily revamped A330 as the aircraft intended to go head-to-head with the B787, that aircraft was not the A330 neo.
The A330 neo is no more a ‘Frankenstein’s monster’ than a 747-8; an aircraft that benefits from new technologies designed for a new aircraft. In this case the A330 has tech that has filtered down from the A350 just as the 747-8 has tech from the 787.
I really like this channel, I’m glad I found it
the 330neo has new winglets AND has a different (new) wing better than the 330ceo...also much upgraded avionics, fms, and other cockpit magic like FLS GLS ROWROP,,,
Airbus bán được A330-neo trong bối cảnh đơn hàng B787 đang quá tải
không khác gì Boeing bán đc B373-max trong bối cảnh A320 cũng đang quá tải đơn hàng và các hãng hàng không phải chờ đợi 1 thời gian quá dài ......
tuy nhiên vẫn không hiểu được, việc thiết kế 1 chiếc B787 nguyên khối rất phức tạp và tốn kém lại khó thay thế sửa chữa, thì đem lại hiệu quả gì hơn so với việc chế tạo A350 được ghép từ nhiều mảnh lại ? vừa dễ sửa chữa thay thế, thậm chí chuyển đổi thành máy bay chở hàng sau nhiều năm phục vụ chở khách ?!!
Who cares how many planes is your competitor selling?
What matters is your production capacity vs your sales.
If you are maxed out, you are maxed out. If competition sells 10 or 100 more planes, that doesnt change the fact you cant build more.
That is Nonsense.
The A330 is very much competitive against the 787, it even beats the 787 on some shorter missions. The 787 is optimised for long haul and ultra long haul, the A330 neo is optimised for mid-haul and 'longish' routes.
Tha a330neo is not selling? Ask Delta, Emirates and Air Aisa X. Also: The A330 (ceo) has always been an incremental seller, same for the neo.
The a350 is a 777 competitor? Well, not quite. It is actually Positioned between the 787 and 777, with a long haul profile.
Every A330CEO is currently being replaced by 787's. The 787 is far better and more fuel efficient than the A330neo. The A330neo is not selling because its simply not better than the 787.
Is that an ACJ A330-neo in the video?
It's actually a hifly a330-900, but with that livery it kinda does look like an ACJ
You seems to not be very neutral in your approach and put more on the spotlight the advantages of the 787 over the a330neo. The 330neo is more than "just" new wings and engines. But a complete new cabin concept design "airspace" new cockpit systems, composite wings etc...
Not only that... with the aging a330 200s, the future looks good for the neo with upgrades and training costs
Strangely the a330 sold more quickly after the b787 was launched than before. A lot of this video is bollocks
Fantástico video y muy buena narración/ presentación. Eres muy bueno en esto.
Buena suerte.
Muchas gracias :) de donde eres? Me gusta que personas en ontras paises les gustan mis videos :)
Coby Explanes Hola, vivo en Dinamarca .
And it will cost much much less to train pilots an a neo than new 787s.
I don't know that it is not selling, it sorta begs the question....................................Do you work for Boeing?
Boeing can keep their 787 with its “composite” body and wings GIVE ME A A330 NEO ANYDAY…
Id say the 900 has done pretty good