|
Post by peter on May 5, 2016 10:43:49 GMT 1
A330's are not built in sequence of the MSN, so it is possible to see e.g. 1725 just starting assembly and 1726 on it's first flight the same day....
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on May 6, 2016 11:04:47 GMT 1
|
|
someone
in service - 1 year
Posts: 3,238
|
Post by someone on May 10, 2016 12:03:37 GMT 1
With another 20 orders this month (13 -300 and 7 -200), the classic A330 seems to keep going strong much longer than most would have thought some years ago
|
|
ghorn
Outfitting in Hamburg
Posts: 993
|
Post by ghorn on May 10, 2016 12:48:59 GMT 1
With another 20 orders this month (13 -300 and 7 -200), the classic A330 seems to keep going strong much longer than most would have thought some years ago And with deliveries being slow the order book of unfilled orders for the A330-200/300 is actually growing. I presume the latest 20 are orders placed by the Chinese government. Geoff
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 10, 2016 13:32:27 GMT 1
And with deliveries being slow the order book of unfilled orders for the A330-200/300 is actually growing. I presume the latest 20 are orders placed by the Chinese government. More accurately, orders placed by one or more Chinese companies, entering into force after a government go-ahead. As I explained many times on this forum, the view that Chinese orders are placed by the government, then assigned to airlines, is entirely wrong. The government only approves ** draft contracts previously agreed between the manufacturer and airlines. Even when the government lumps company applications together to approve them, which puts the spotlight on the government, the decision is backed by existing draft contracts. COMAC sales might be a different case. ** I would not say that the government 'rubber-stamps' draft contracts, since some applications are delayed, or may even be refused in rare cases. I believe however that manufacturers book the orders in the 'undisclosed customer' category pending official government approval. It's all about showing deference for the government.
|
|
|
Post by ff on May 10, 2016 14:02:09 GMT 1
And with deliveries being slow the order book of unfilled orders for the A330-200/300 is actually growing. I presume the latest 20 are orders placed by the Chinese government. More accurately, orders placed by one or more Chinese companies, entering into force after a government go-ahead. As I explained many times on this forum, the view that Chinese orders are placed by the government, then assigned to airlines, is entirely wrong. The government only approves ** draft contracts previously agreed between the manufacturer and airlines. Even when the government lumps company applications together to approve them, which puts the spotlight on the government, the decision is backed by existing draft contracts. COMAC sales might be a different case. ** I would not say that the government 'rubber-stamps' draft contracts, since some applications are delayed, or may even be refused in rare cases. I believe however that manufacturers book the orders in the 'undisclosed customer' category pending official government approval. It's all about showing deference for the government. That is correct, but not entirely true.
There are two types of Chinese orders, one was initiated by demand from individual airlines, which has been correctly described above by philidor. They are typically small orders with 10-30 frames per order.
The other type of Chinese order is controlled by CASC as a political/negotiation tool, typically during Chinese president or premier's visit to USA or European. They would sign a giant contract through CASC, which normally has hundreds of frames in each order - like we've seen for B737, B787 and A320. Sometimes includes other aircraft types as well, like A330 and A350.
They are NOT pre-allocated, airlines typically DON'T know how many they will get, nor the price. It is then up to each airline then "request" to have some quota (private and small airlines) or "be allocated" a certain number (state controlled large airlines), and to negotiate delivery slots. We saw the former more and more happening in recent years. Sometimes CASC will ask airlines what they want and how many frames roughly they want, but this is not always the case.
The next large order from China, is expected to be the later version of contract with Airbus (USA is pending election, so no major order will happen right now until 2018). It is expected that once the A330 centre been built in Tianjin, CASC will make a further order for A330neo and A350, to secure more work to be moved to China for A330neo production.
A number of airlines already hinted that they prefer A350 for long haul, like China Eastern MU. But A330neo would still be perfect to replace some old A330s operating in China in the next 10-15 years.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 10, 2016 14:33:02 GMT 1
Sorry, ff, NO.
The government can incite, impulse, negociate. In short, it can facilitate or hinder sales. This is what happened with the A330 negociation.
Nowadays however, the government never (except probably if the manufacturer is COMAC !) takes the risk of speculative (= not backed by an airline) orders.
The government cannot force an airline to take delivery of an aircraft type it does not want. This was demonstrated the last time they tried, in the nineties. Chancellor Kohl travelled to China and 'sold' six A340s, but the firm contract was passed by the central aircraft purchase office, with the result that all companies refused to take delivery, and the government was embarrassed. I don't remember how this ended but the result is that we now have a two-step process, in which airlines sign first, then only the government approves.
One of the reason companies refuse orders passed by any central organisation is that airlines believe such an institution only serves to collect perks .... at their own detriment.
|
|
|
Post by ff on May 10, 2016 19:27:35 GMT 1
Sorry, ff, NO. The government can incite, impulse, negociate. In short, it can facilitate or hinder sales. This is what happened with the A330 negociation. Nowadays however, the government never (except probably if the manufacturer is COMAC !) takes the risk of speculative (= not backed by an airline) orders. The government cannot force an airline to take delivery of an aircraft type it does not want. This was demonstrated the last time they tried, in the nineties. Chancellor Kohl travelled to China and 'sold' six A340s, but the firm contract was passed by the central aircraft purchase office, with the result that all companies refused to take delivery, and the government was embarrassed. I don't remember how this ended but the result is that we now have a two-step process, in which airlines sign first, then only the government approves. One of the reason companies refuse orders passed by any central organisation is that airlines believe such an institution only serves to collect perks .... at their own detriment. Those 6 A340-313 ended with Air China. B-2385/2386/2387 was with CA from 1997, B-2388/2389/2390 with China Southwest from 1998, subsequently merged with Air China. They have been told to have these frame, although they are Boeing oriented. China Eastern didn't want them, but you can always find a state airline to take them.
I don't think we will agree on this point.
What I can confirm is, the last two large government backed orders, CASC order of 70 A320 in October 2014, and CASC order of 300 B737 during the president's visit to USA, both did not have designated / confirmed airline to take exact number of frames.
If "allocation" word is too heavy, they were "internally negotiated" among airlines and CASC, to further confirm the allocation afterwards. Up until today, that 300 B737 have not all been confirmed which airline to go for.
I forgot the 30 A330 and 100 A320 signed in October 2015, and the 45 A330 signed in June 2015. Those 30 A330 is still showing under CASC on Airbus order book published today, and they haven't been assigned to airlines yet. None of the airlines were involved in this purchase.
Airbus only updates their order book, once separate contract has been signed with individual airline.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on May 11, 2016 6:57:22 GMT 1
It's your right not to believe me. There is much more in the aircraft sales business than publically available information ...
|
|
|
Post by ff on May 11, 2016 9:02:47 GMT 1
It's your right not to believe me. There is much more in the aircraft sales business than publically available information ... Yes, it is OK to agree on disagree.
My source came from the airlines, someone sit on their board. And I often go to China (Tianjin), to do business with...
Sorry, can't tell you that. Confidential.
|
|