ghorn
Outfitting in Hamburg
Posts: 993
|
Post by ghorn on Dec 3, 2017 23:58:19 GMT 1
Very pleased to see momentum building with A350 deliveries. I hope it continues into 2018. We can’t assume that December will be even better than November as there is a shortage of good candidates for immediate delivery. To summarise ; Good candidates. 155, 164, 165, 170, 173, 175, 176. Other possibles if progress rapidly 177, 179 Three hopefully for QR including the first -1000. 78, 88, 132 The Chinese conundrum 60, 98, 112 awaiting CAAC certification and 167 and 178 for CA may not be ready even if the CAAC gives the green light. Overall 12 for the month would represent a great success. If problems persist it could be less than 10. As ever thanks to www.a350-production.com/production-listGeoff
|
|
|
Post by ca350 on Dec 4, 2017 0:10:04 GMT 1
It's kinda hard to predict right now because frames that roll out in the next week still have a good shot to make the 2017 delivery. As you said, CAAC certification will play a role on the December A350 delivery. If hopefully the certificate is granted, I would assume MSN 167 will be the first Chinese mainland delivery because CA will likely get the "First" just like they did with 737MAX.
MSN 78, 88 and 132 for QR sound like a sure bet for me.
So if no CAAC certificate: 10-12 deliveries.
If CAAC turns on the green light: 14+
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Dec 4, 2017 0:12:54 GMT 1
As has been pointed out several times, CAAC certificering is not required as Airbus can/will deliver those aircraft to the lessor anyway as they did with MSN 52/55.
|
|
|
Post by ca350 on Dec 4, 2017 0:23:44 GMT 1
As has been pointed out several times, CAAC certificering is not required as Airbus can/will deliver those aircraft to the lessor anyway as they did with MSN 52/55. Thanks for the reminder. I've been thinking about Chinese airlines getting their hands on the plane. But yeah MSN60, 98 and 112 are all from lessors.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Dec 4, 2017 1:57:19 GMT 1
As has been pointed out several times, CAAC certificering is not required as Airbus can/will deliver those aircraft to the lessor anyway as they did with MSN 52/55. I am not sure about that, because it depends on contract wording. The aircraft not being certified in the operator's country may be a valid reason for a lessor to postpone delivery.
|
|
K
spotted unpainted on the Flight Line (waiting for painting)
Posts: 1,130
|
Post by K on Dec 4, 2017 3:46:30 GMT 1
direct purchase for CCA and forget the certification this year...
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Dec 4, 2017 10:19:30 GMT 1
I am not sure about that, because it depends on contract wording. The aircraft not being certified in the operator's country may be a valid reason for a lessor to postpone delivery. Yet the lessor agreed to accept MSN 52 and 55.
|
|
mjoelnir
in service - 2 years
Posts: 4,089
|
Post by mjoelnir on Dec 4, 2017 11:37:42 GMT 1
I am not sure about that, because it depends on contract wording. The aircraft not being certified in the operator's country may be a valid reason for a lessor to postpone delivery. Yet the lessor agreed to accept MSN 52 and 55. They were original not ordered for a Chinese airline.
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Dec 4, 2017 11:57:59 GMT 1
They were original not ordered for a Chinese airline. So are MSN 60/98/112, on order by AerCap and/or ALC.
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Dec 4, 2017 15:38:30 GMT 1
Yet the lessor agreed to accept MSN 52 and 55. I doubt there was any certification issue in the case you refer to. In general, lack of aircraft certification must be at least a suspensive clause, if not a cancellation clause. In this case, however, the aircraft is certified by EASA and FAA, but not by the operator's national authority (China's CAAC). Does this situation trigger a suspensive clause ... Or not ?
|
|