Airbus: More Than 1,000 Orders Coming For A330neo

Shortly after Boeing’s 787 twin-aisle jet program was launched in 2004, Airbus proposed an upgrade of its A330 to counter the threat. The concept was rejected as insufficient by leasing guru Steven Udvar-Hazy and other top customers, however, and the manufacturer ultimately moved forward instead with an all-new airplane, the A350.
Last week, Airbus began development of the reengined A330, dubbed the A330neo, essentially killing off one member of the A350 family, the A350-800. And in an ...

SUBSCRIBE TO ACCESS THIS PREMIUM CONTENT

"Airbus: More Than 1,000 Orders Coming For A330neo" is part of the new Aviation Week & Space Technology subscription, now available online and in our newly launched mobile app.

Current Aviation Week & Space Technology magazine subscribers: online and mobile access are now included at no added charge to you. To read this full article, use your subscriber email to log in to your account (or contact us for assistance in updating your account).

Not currently a subscriber? Subscribe NOW to our introductory launch special (up to 40% off regular rates), available exclusively at Aviationweek.com. Simply click below to choose your preferred option to receive immediate online and mobile access.

Discuss this Article 20

Hmmm! I suppose what we are seeing is the distortive impact of what is politely described as launch aid. Were it not for this one feature of Airbus' R&D, this silliness of wasting money on developing an all new aircraft to then subvert its success in the market with an upgraded existing platform would not have happened. But hey, if EU citizens are happy to have their tax euros squandered like this, who am I to complain?

The A350 is a successful attack against the 777.
E.g. JAL, Singapore Airlines and others ordered the A350 to replace their 777.

The A330NEO is now the counter attack against the 787.

To step back and rethink a situation is not a bad habit. Well, Airbus was pushed by costumers to do the NEO but then Airbus concurred the A330-200NEO aka A330-800 was a far better solution then the A350-800.

BTW the original A330 was financed by so called reimbursed launch aid. Now the EU gets paid for every A330 sold by Airbus no matter if it is a CEO or a NEO. The A330 was a really good deal for the EU.

After promoting the 787 as roomier and more comfortable than existing airliners, U.S. customers seem to have standardized on a 3-3-3 layout with 26.9" wide seats. If Airbus delivers A330neos to U.S customers with the same 2-4-2 28" width layout as existing U.S customers have installed on their A330s, the choice for the economy traveler should be an easy one.

The A330, like the DC9 family and the 767, has always impressed due to the availability of 2-abreast seating in economy. Because of the wide center divide, U.S. Airways A330s are effectively 2-2-2-2, which is great for a transatlantic trip. It's a nice aircraft. As things stand, I'd take a 767 over a 787 to cross the pond.

It's strange how m_5teve has a short memory when he talks about subsidies. The Boeing 777X programme was launched last November with a truly mind-boggling bung of $9 billion in tax breaks from Washington State. The package is the largest subsidy any state or local government has given to a single company in U.S. history.

That comes after a decade in which the company was able to zero out its income tax liability to every state on $35 billion in U.S. profits. Citizens for Tax Justice reported that month that, in addition to the state tax breaks, Boeing got $1.8 billion in federal income tax rebates over the last 10 years.

So one of America's most profitable manufacturers pays no taxes.

It doesn't end there. In 2013, the U.S. Export-Import Bank subsidised Boeing to the tune of $7.9 billion of loan guarantees, giving the company leverage to sell 106 aircraft to international customers. In 2012, The World Trade Organization ruled that Boeing had received $5.3 billion in illegal government subsidies over a quarter-century.

The U.S., and the European countries have their own mechanisms to subsidize the "sporty game". The upfront costs and risks are simply too huge. Without those mechanisms those nations would be surrendering their stake in the industry.

Launch aid and tax breaks aren't the same thing. Launch aid is money in hand at the outset while a tax break is paying less on the money you earn. Airbus is given a hand-out while Boeing has to earn its way. Big difference!!!

When a company is as established as either Airbus or Boeing are, it makes no substantial difference. Both turn over vastly in excess of the tax break amounts talked about; therefore it merely means its the absence of a -ive on the end-year balance sheet rather than being a +ive on the same sheet (which incidentally, would then be taxed!).

@stealth, Airbus is not required to repay anything until they begin to make a 'profit'. Hence, they are at liberty to sell below cost for the sole purpose of denying Boeing market share. Btw, the tax Boeing does or doesn't pay is on money it earns - not money given to it.

How dumb can you be and still be running a an aviation company.
The Airbus A330neo is still heaver that the 787-8-9-or 10 meaning it will burn more fuel.the real reason i believe these airline and leasing company are buying this aircraft is because airbus is offering it at a lower price than Boeing new offering the 787 family.but to say they will match the 787 in fuel burn is just simply not possible if it is 20 thousand pound heaver.common sense can tell them that..

Airbus ( Mr Leahy ) in their marketing approach will the Pinocchio they have blamed Boeing to be in the Aviation Week magazine in 2013. Fortunately the airlines are not stupid and not buying planes on Mr Leahy opinion but facts.

deekeysbcs@yahoo.com - of course it is possible, the aircraft will be put into service a decade and a half after the dreamliner engines were going through certification. They are a generational leap ahead in efficiencies, According to you argument, the B737MAX has to burn the same fuel as the B737NG. And
neil.marshall@b.. on subsidies, I couldn't have said it better myself.

As mhalblaub@web.de mentioned, Airbus is countering Boeing's aircraft. With that statement I agree, but that means that Airbus is the continued follower, not the leader. That's all they can do at this point. Subsidies, both get them in one way or another, but for a Airbus to cry about it, give me a break. They lost their butt on the A380 and the wings on most are STILL not fixed, many people forgot that huh? Now you don't want to build the A350-800 because you didn't sell enough, what will you NOT want to build next after marketing them?

Billybob did you forget "Boeing said on Friday that it had discovered tiny cracks in the wings of about 40 Dreamliners currently in production. It was the latest setback for the advanced airliner, though the plane maker said it was confident the problem did not involve any of the 787s in service."

I feel the launching by Airbus of the A-330 N.E.O. is a very good business move as by being able to offer this proven and upgraded Aircraft at a very competitive price in the market will prove a strong selling point as has been seen at Farnborough / Launch .
Good fortune to Airbus, and Rolls Royce.

Newsletter Signup

By clicking below, I acknowledge and agree to Penton's Terms of Service
and to Penton's use of my contact information to communicate with me about Penton's or its third-party
partners' products, services, events and research opportunities. Penton's use of the information I
provide will be consistent with Penton's Privacy Policy.

I acknowledge and agree to Penton's Terms of Service and to Penton's
use of my contact information to communicate with me about offerings by
Penton, its brands, affiliates and/or third-party partners, consistent
with Penton's Privacy Policy.*