Now that the A380 program has come to an end, it remains to be seen which aircraft the airlines will choose.
In fact, this raises two questions: which aircraft for those who want to acquire long-haul aircraft and which aircraft to replace the A380s that will leave the fleet. Not only will the program have had a short lifespan, but it does not seem that the airlines that own A380s want to keep them in their fleet for too long.
Two distinct needs
There are in fact two distinct needs on the airline side. Medium” capacity for point-to-point or hub and large capacity for hubs in general. Then you will say to me “but we saw with the A380 that the big capacity did not work”. Yes and no.
The problem with the A380 was twofold. The first was its capacity which made it difficult to fill for many airlines for whom it was only profitable on a few routes. And the second was the fact that it was a four-engine engine: difficult to fill with two engines, but no way with four.
We have roughly four aircraft on the market: the Airbus A330 Neo and A350 and the Boeing B777X and 787. We do not consider the 330 Neo as a future device and its commercial success will certainly be below the other 3 so we will focus on them.
However, comparing them is not easy. Each is available in different versions, with different capabilities which requires a fairly granular approach.
We can consider that there are four segments.
- Less than 300 passengers: B787-800 and B787-9
- from 300 to 350: A350-900, B787-10 or A350-1000
- from 350 to 400 : A350-1000, B777x-8
- Above 400: B777x-9
The match of planes with less than 300 seats
We find here the B787-8 and 9 because the project of a “small” A350-8 has been buried. So there is no match except for the airlines that would like to have more flexibility with cabins of a little more than 300 seats. But in the small twin-aisle long-haul market, the 787 wins for lack of a contender. Perhaps Airbus wanted to avoid a useless commercial battle by thinking that this niche was either too small or could be addressed by slightly larger aircraft.
Orders to date:
- 787-8 : 804
- 787-9 : 444
The match for planes with less than 300 to 350 seats
There is a match between the A350-900 or even 1000 (it is just above the gauge), and B787-10.
Apart from the fact that if we were to judge only by aesthetics the 350 would win over the 787, this one is also quieter, has a greater range. It also offers a slightly larger cabin. But the 787 is supposed to consume 10% less. On the other hand, the takeoff weight of the Airbus is greater for the same number of passengers. Finally very few differences. And what do the airlines say about orders?
787-10 : 173
A350-900 : 741
A350-1000 : 173
A clear victory for Airbus, which shows that the 787 is a small-capacity aircraft and the 350 a medium-capacity aircraft (“small” and “medium” taken from the perspective of a twin-aisle long-haul aircraft).
But if we consider that there is a unique segment of 350 seats and less, it is Boeing and its 787 that is doing well.
The 350 to 400 seat aircraft match
We have two competitors:the A350-1000 from Airbus and the future 777X-8 from Boeing. To date, 53 units of the latter have been ordered, compared with 173 for the A350-1000. But as this is a more recent program, it is not running at full speed. A little shorter than 350, it has a much larger wingspan, so it can be folded to avoid being cramped in airports.
On the other hand, it offers a much wider fuselage than the A350 and promises to be 10% more cost-effective.
What are its chances of reversing the trend against the 350? In our opinion, the 777X is very strong, because we are almost certain that Boeing will repeat the success of the 777, known as the “money maker”, an aircraft with a very good economic performance.
To summarize what a pilot told me about the 777: “it goes faster, higher, further than the others and for less money”. For the farthest we will see, but for the rest we are ready to believe.
Le match des avions de plus de 400 places
Does this market exist? The failure of the A380 would tend to prove otherwise. But it was a four-engine aircraft. On very high demand routes there is room for an efficient aircraft as long as it is twin engine. The success of the 777-300ER, which hurt the A380, is proof of this. And there, with 414 seats, Airbus has nothing to oppose Boeing, which has already sold 273 units of an aircraft that has not yet, like the 777X-8, made its first test flight, which finds itself alone in a rather promising market:
- Replacement of A380s that “made sense
- Replacement of the 747
- Replacement of the 777-300 and 777-300ER
When we see the number of 777-300 and 300ER in circulation and the number of airlines that operate them, the positioning of the 777X-9 is bound to succeed. Especially since Airbus has abandoned the idea of an A350-2000 with 400 seats.
Verdict: Boeing wins.
Thanks to a better coverage of the need for twin-aisle long-haul aircraft, Boeing seems to be the big winner in the years to come.The 350 may be superior to the 787, but the granularity of the Boeing range is the best, especially at the two ends of the market where Airbus is absent. Being an excellent aircraft, the A350 has a very broad positioning. This is its strength, but also its weakness compared to Boeing which has a specific response to each need. And the order books prove it.
After that, there are not only twin-aisle aircraft on the long-haul market, there are also single-aisle aircraft, but that’s another subject.
Photo : Airbus A380 by G Tipene, Boeing 787 by vaalaa, Airbus byFasttailwind
via Shutterstock
