PDA

View Full Version : EK - Potential 787 order and company direction


Monarch Man
22nd Jul 2017, 18:53
Given the rumours persisting regarding an impending EK order, Im interested in what opinions might be regarding the closer co-operation across the airport along with the direction we seem to be taking in terms of airframes.
Inevitably some on here will turn this into an A v B or 4 v 2 debate, for me thats part and parcel, FWIW I think if there is a 787 or 350 order its a positive thing to match capacity with the market.
Over to the real experts out there.

gearlever
22nd Jul 2017, 19:02
I'm not an expert at all. But I got the impression it has noting to do with A versus B.

IMHO it's about Trumpmenistan (America First) versus Europe.

Odins Raven
22nd Jul 2017, 20:40
Surely it will be a case of swapping the remaining 380 orders for 350s if capacity is the problem for the foreseeable future? I'm not sure what price the 380s were negotiated for, but you'd think it would be somewhere in the order of 1.3 - 1.5 350s for every 380 that's due to be delivered?

The Outlaw
23rd Jul 2017, 03:15
Surely it will be a case of swapping the remaining 380 orders for 350s if capacity is the problem for the foreseeable future? I'm not sure what price the 380s were negotiated for, but you'd think it would be somewhere in the order of 1.3 - 1.5 350s for every 380 that's due to be delivered?

Don't call me Surely...

Jack330
23rd Jul 2017, 03:46
There's a rumor saying the 787's or at least a part of them ( if the order is confirmed), would probably go under the FZ AOC.
Any info ?

crewlog
23rd Jul 2017, 05:10
There's a rumor saying the 787's or at least a part of them ( if the order is confirmed), would probably go under the FZ AOC.
Any info ?

787 and 777 are commin type so I do not see 787 on FZ AOC.

BigGeordie
23rd Jul 2017, 07:33
Historically, legacy carriers trying to get into the low-cost market have not been very successful. BA tried a few years ago with Go.

Then again, in many ways, EK resembles a low-cost carrier anyway.

Alloy
23rd Jul 2017, 09:34
Historically, legacy carriers trying to get into the low-cost market have not been very successful. BA tried a few years ago with Go.

Then again, in many ways, EK resembles a low-cost carrier anyway.

Qantas with Jetstar and Korean Air with JinAir seem to be doing fairly well in the low cost market. As an outsider of the ME, my perception is that FlyDubai is a low cost carrier and that the majority of EK's work is as a glorified slaveship.

jack schidt
23rd Jul 2017, 13:26
A350 is a very capable airplane and converting A380s to A350s would fit the requirement while wiggling out of an embarrassing over order on the Whale.

787, nice jet but that's just another expenditure when cutbacks are clearly a priority and would leave the A380 over order in place.

J

fliion
2nd Aug 2017, 14:39
https://www.thenational.ae/business/aviation/sheikh-ahmed-emirates-to-decide-on-boeing-or-airbus-multibillion-dollar-order-1.616098

Definitive confirmation of order - though type still not stated.

High Energy
2nd Aug 2017, 16:59
https://www.thenational.ae/business/aviation/sheikh-ahmed-emirates-to-decide-on-boeing-or-airbus-multibillion-dollar-order-1.616098

Definitive confirmation of order - though type still not stated.

Emirates 787's ...operated by flydubai. Not too far fetched these days.

fatbus
2nd Aug 2017, 22:19
Muller has been heard saying the 350 is too big for their needs. 787 is a better size. 380 start to reach 12 years old as of 2020 and will start to retire( 2022/3 more likely) when the 777x starts to arrive. All Boeing by @ 2030. Just a guess.

Hansol
3rd Aug 2017, 09:13
Putting some or all of the 787/350 under Fly Dubai also allows the revision of T+C's for new joiners or those being upgraded.

glofish
3rd Aug 2017, 09:36
Putting some or all 787 under Fly Dubai hampers one of its greatest assets for EK: MFF with the 777 family. This is a huge advantage in terms of daily flexibility (and at the same time hints against a 350 fleet).
As long as there are many EK routes prone to such flexibel deployment for different sized aircraft, i guess the 787 will be flown under EK flag.

On top of that, there is no MFF (at the moment) between 787 and 737.
There might however be some FZ routes permitting 787s, but those routes might be changed to EK before FZ would get a small numbered additional fleet.

This might sound bad for FZ pilots. I have always advocated for a start at FZ for cadets and new skippers in Dubai, with a swap to EK after a few years. This would take out jealousy and politics in pilot-staffing, would increase experience in this region and therefore overall airmanship in the group, plus it would be the more flexibel and therefore cheaper solution.

Mr Mac
3rd Aug 2017, 11:57
Hope you do not go 787, terrible plane to fly in as a passenger in my experiance.


Regards
Mr Mac

jack schidt
3rd Aug 2017, 12:43
As a whale driver, I really don't mind (care) what EK orders. I do care about all my colleagues at EK and if the 787 makes the 777 drivers happier, then that's great (although they do often say that the 777 is such a superior aircraft to fly, so why change?).

If the 787 comes, that means that the 777 drivers will be slightly happier on the newer equipment to the same, same old destinations that the whale can't operate into. If however the A350 comes then a few bus drivers will look forward to flying this elegant beast while helping out the superior drivers with their non A380 destinations, although flying to the prime twin engine (newest shiny jet) destinations.

Either way everyone is happy. Bring on the 787 = whale drivers continue as planned (happy) while PRUne becomes a 787 is/isn't better than a 777 thread. If the A350 comes then the 777 drivers get some relief while the latest and greatest A350 takes the prime twin routes/destinations.

Either way it makes absolutely no difference to the monthly pay check or the size of most drivers family jewels.

Enjoy your coming weekend..

J

TangoUniform
3rd Aug 2017, 14:05
John Deere drivers be careful what you wish for. Think about the destinations and use of a smaller gauged aircraft. But then again, we're the smaller gauged aircraft now, so Imguess, bring it on. Maybe it's the Airbus guys that should worry if the 350 is the choice. Dual qual for 380/350?

notapilot15
4th Aug 2017, 00:10
They already ordered enough for next 20 years and need more? Which aviation management school these guys attended.

donpizmeov
4th Aug 2017, 04:28
The one that says you need to replace old aircraft? Bar 15 380s everything on the books now are replacement aircraft.

BigGeordie
4th Aug 2017, 19:10
What Don says is well worth bearing in mind for any F/O joining now.

fliion
4th Aug 2017, 19:58
In three years time we will be net -1 777 from today.

From head of training in RGTS

Kamelchaser
5th Aug 2017, 00:25
I'm not sure many of our new joiners are coming here with thoughts of a quick command any more. Most are joining for their first jet job..at the very least for their first wide-body job. I doubt many are under the illusion they'll be getting a command at EK any time soon. I'll bet the majority are here to get the hours and move on to something more long term.

The Zohan
5th Aug 2017, 11:00
Dual qual for 380/350?

Nope, Airbus says that size and performance count more than cockpit layout.

tz

Capn Rex Havoc
5th Aug 2017, 11:50
Nope, Airbus says that size and performance count more than cockpit layout.

Yeah, but was interesting that the 330 and 345 were MFF - and that was about 140 Tonne difference in size.

fatbus
6th Aug 2017, 00:36
320-330 at a few operators,but cockpits were the same

777-200LR
6th Aug 2017, 05:27
I agree with kamelchaser, most junior guys I fly with never mention the upgrade. I get very interesting conversations about how much more money they make now!

trimotor
6th Aug 2017, 08:52
A vs B, whatever...my spies tell me that the 787 would be run as a separate fleet, with no MFF, so I'd guess the 350 would be the same. Crews can get qualified by CCQ but then remain on a single type, despite GCAA ATPLs having both 777/787 listed as a common type.

High Energy
6th Aug 2017, 12:48
A vs B, whatever...my spies tell me that the 787 would be run as a separate fleet, with no MFF, so I'd guess the 350 would be the same. Crews can get qualified by CCQ but then remain on a single type, despite GCAA ATPLs having both 777/787 listed as a common type.

Quite a few airlines that operate them seperately right? What could be the reason behind that? Just interested as Boeings selling point would be cross commonality and a common typerating.

fliion
6th Aug 2017, 12:58
I agree with kamelchaser, most junior guys I fly with never mention the upgrade. I get very interesting conversations about how much more money they make now!

Would they be A scale or B scalers?

🤔

clear to land
6th Aug 2017, 15:12
At a guess a reason for separation would be 773, 77W, 77L, 77-8, 77-9 then throw 78-8/9 in. Then with small (<30 order) would expect a Max of 2 78 Sims so Recurrent Training bottleneck. Way too many differences to make viable safety case for MFF until Fleet Retirement leaves 77-8/9 and 78-8/9.

glofish
6th Aug 2017, 15:32
773, 77W, 77L, 77-8, 77-9 then throw 78-8/9 in

I guess by the time a 787 could fly in EK colours, there will be no more terrible 773's hovering around. Same goes for the mighty 77L's.

Most probably a fleet with 788/789 plus 778/779 will be in force. That's basically 2 types with each 2 different lengths. No problem at all for MFF, just a matter of certification, meaning money. But this would be put off so fast with the efficiency.

MFF for 350 and 380 might be achievable, but i would fancy very expensive. Let's not forget that between a 2-holer and a 4-holer there are extensive operational and performance differences.

donpizmeov
6th Aug 2017, 15:48
Well the two holer 330 and the four holer 340 seemed to work ok. So maybe it aint the number of engines.

glofish
6th Aug 2017, 15:53
It was to a certain extent, because you needed an alternating PPC , which was always somewhat of a planning stumbling block.
Basically the reason why most actual 78 operators don't opt for MFF, is that the fleet is still too small. With an eventual order from EK, the 78 numbers would warrant for the MFF purchase, because hearing through the grapevine, the 78/77 MFF would not have this PPC restriction.

MorgdalRamtoos
6th Aug 2017, 16:02
Two weeks ago, this site claimed the 787 deal was done:

http://www.strategicaeroresearch.com/2017/07/17/done-deal-emirates-selects-787s-over-a350s

There is also a post by an Emirates crew member/staff who also claims that FCOM docs for 787 are within Emirates documentation.

Also, is it true that many EK drivers are now dual rated for 777-787?

What about the planned 777X drivers?

jack schidt
6th Aug 2017, 18:14
Airbus MFF 380 - 350 not going to happen. The A380 has the original Airbus concept cockpit with additional toys. The A350 was a new design cockpit which got away from the older designs.

The cockpit differences, along with the specifications and performance differences make it a bad MFF option.

EK drivers nearly wrote of an A340 with much more similar cockpits and closer operating weights. Not going to happen in my opinion.

J