Cathay Pacific Considers Buying Larger Version Boeing 787

Join this forum to discuss the latest news that happened in the world of commercial aviation.

Moderator: Latest news team

User avatar
David747
Posts: 777
Joined: 11 May 2006, 00:00
Location: Teterboro KTEB, USA

Post by David747 »

CX wrote:$2.74bn isn't that much if they are getting large widebodies right? i don't know...
Will not be surprising for them to operate both 787 and A350, unless they want a change.
I thought the 788 would be something of a A330 replacement, but if they are demanding a 'larger' and 'farther' 787, then that's not what they are intending to do.. pure expansion??
Could be expansion. 787-10 could be used on other routes. But where will CX be expanding to?

User avatar
CX
Posts: 788
Joined: 30 Jul 2005, 00:00

Post by CX »

RC20 wrote:If they are pushing for that class aircraft, at least per their past practice, the only choice would be the 787-10.

The A350 would not have any service history, and -10 would have at least the basic systems, though it would entail significant changes. That still outside Cathay Pacific past practice.

Reality may be that they don’t have the choice to be conservative anymore and will join up with others, take the hits from new aircraft introduction knowing it will pay off in the long term.
They were the first operator of 777-300, and to order A350s before its service entry Airbus should surely offer significant discounts, especially if packaged with A380s, so it might be worth the gamble', while of course 787-10 is a little safer with more mature systems, but i mean A350 is pretty much equal to A380 in terms of avionics anyway.
But as I said, they are used to operate both makes of aircrafts in the similar class, so if I am to place a bet, I would guess they get a big batch of 787-9s for replacing/supplementing A333s, A343s, while a split order between A350-900s and A350-1000s for replacing 772s and 773s..

RC20
Posts: 547
Joined: 09 Dec 2005, 00:00

Post by RC20 »

I believe it was partly the experience with the 777-300 that confirmed the policy of not being among the first for new aircraft.

User avatar
CX
Posts: 788
Joined: 30 Jul 2005, 00:00

Post by CX »

RC20 wrote:I believe it was partly the experience with the 777-300 that confirmed the policy of not being among the first for new aircraft.
what's wrong with 777-300?

smokejumper
Posts: 1033
Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:00
Location: Northern Virginia USA

Post by smokejumper »

Ruscoe wrote:
boomer535 wrote: Even the A350-1000 won't have enough range for them then.
Weight wise the 350-1000 is in a different category than the 787, and will offer an inch more width per passenger than the 787.

I think this is one of the problems for the 350-10, in that it has more weight but can still only go out to 9 abreast, so Boeing can match them for capacity with a lighter aircraft, and hence more efficient aircraft.

The extra comfort of one inch more width I personally think is a plus, but for the travelling public must not be so. In the intense war between Virgin Blue and Qantas (320 v 737) I have not heard it mentioned. The level of the extra width is in the cabin is also a factor obviously.

Ruscoe
In a recent Aviation Week article, Boeing was described a being reluctant to stretch the 787 beyond the 310-320 passenger limit they have proposed since such a stretch (to 350 passengers) would necessitate expensive modifications (6 bogy landing gear, stronger wing box, etc.). This is the stated reason, although I'm sure that potential impacts on the "golden goose" 777-300 are also on the table.

The Airbus 350-1000 proposes to be a long-range 350 passenger plane. If we assume that no major structural modifications are required to go from the A350-900 to the -1000, then Airbus has designed the A350-1000 capabilty into the baseline design and this may account for some of the extra weight (over the B787) since the extra strengthening is already included.

RC20
Posts: 547
Joined: 09 Dec 2005, 00:00

Post by RC20 »

CX wrote: what's wrong with 777-300?
Once it worked the bugs out its been a stellar performer. However, there were the usual annoying odds and ends that cause flight delays or cancellations. Nothing you wouldn't expect, but Cathay Pacific does not like that. Quite seriously they don't.


They ordered some of the last 747-400ERFs available (some of the last of those slots available)-my take is because they did not want to deal with the new 747-8.

Their philosophy is not to be close to the lead user of any new aircraft, and when they have been or up front, they have not liked the wringing out process. It impact their image and they take that seriously.

Again, they may be changing, but that’s been past practice, and they have been adamant about it.

Post Reply