While Airbus insists it is focused on performance tweaks for the A330, rather than a re-engined version, the continuing sales of the twinjet and the absence of orders for the A350-800 has generated increasing uncertainty over its strategy for the 250-seat sector.
The so-far fictitious A330neo remains nothing more than a presumptive designation, but Airbus Group chief Tom Enders’ speech at an investor forum last month did little to settle the matter.
While mentioning the “incremental innovation” within the Airbus commercial aircraft division, he added: “Take the [A320neo] concept. That’s something we’ll apply and try to apply in other areas as well.
“We do not always need brand-new products, with all the price tag that comes with that.”
Airbus chief Fabrice Bregier added, at the same forum, that there was “still a lot to extract” from its current series programmes.
Although their comments fall far short of an unambiguous signal that the A330neo is an option, the airframer’s interest in prolonging the life of the A330 through enhanced capabilities – combined with the unexpected strength of interest in the A320neo – might make the possibility harder to dismiss than Airbus had envisioned.
The A330 has continued to score sales, aided by near-term availability and delayed introduction of the 787. Although the overall backlog for the passenger A330 has been declining since 2008, the result of falling -200 sales and higher output, that for the -300 has become more robust over the same period.
But Airbus, which had been expecting interest in the A330 to wane as the 787 established itself and the A350 emerged, has been left wondering whether the sales are evidence of longer-term potential – which might justify a re-engined model – or the twinjet equivalent of a dead-cat bounce.
Airbus forecasts that the 300- to 350-seat sector will require over 2,250 aircraft in the next 20 years. But while the A350-900 is aimed at this market, the airframer also forecasts more than 2,400 jets are needed in the 250- to 300-seat category.
Unlike the A320neo an A330neo would not be competing against a similarly warmed-over airframe, but against the all-new design of the 787 – ironically the same head-to-head which forced Airbus to opt for its own all-new A350 XWB family rather than pursue an updated derivative.
Two-thirds of the 276-seat A350-800’s order backlog has evaporated, either through cancellations or customer migration to the larger -900.
Qatar Airways was the launch customer for the A350-800, before switching its order, but the airline has not been briefed on any A330neo proposal according to a source familiar with the situation.
American Airlines' recent decision to convert US Airways’ order for 18 A350-800s removed another major customer for the type. Those accounting for the remaining 61 aircraft are increasingly a mix of customers who have already part converted – such as ILFC, Aeroflot and Asiana – or are unlikely to take delivery, such as Kingfisher Airlines.
Although the A350-800 competes with the Boeing 787-9, its US rival has not experienced a similar lack of interest. The 787-9, which has taken over 400 orders, benefits from being a stretch of the basic 787-8, while the A350-800 is a shrink of the baseline -900 – and one which Airbus elected not to optimise, against its original intention.
The A350-800 is due to enter service in 2016 and Airbus’s position is that it remains committed to the aircraft, even though it has encouraged customers to trade up to its larger sisters. Airbus would rather use valuable production slots for the more valuable A350-900 and -1000, especially if continued A330 manufacture is limiting the conversion of its line to A350 construction.
Airbus’s arguments against the A330neo have remained fairly constant. Its previous attempt to generate interest in a re-engined A330 – the original A350, which would have required a $5 billion investment – attracted only limited interest against the 787, and the airframer believes a derivative aircraft, while capable of landing orders, will remain at a disadvantage against a new airframe.
It has also stressed that attaching new engines to an airframe refined and optimised over two decades of service is an expensive exercise, at a time of heavy investment demand from the A350 and A320neo, while the A380 has yet to reach production break-even.
Airbus cites the lower acquisition cost of the A330 as a competitive edge that helps offset its fuel-burn disadvantage against the 787, an edge which would be eroded by an expensive revamp. The extent to which an engine manufacturer might shoulder the required investment in a re-engined A330 is unclear.
General Electric had been proposing its GEnx engine for A330 derivatives as far back as 2006, after Airbus’s decision to abandon the original A350 – for which GE was to provide a powerplant – in favour of the A350 XWB. GE has not developed an engine for the XWB, which is available only with the Rolls-Royce Trent XWB.
Certification data indicates that the weight of the GEnx-1B is comparable to the Rolls-Royce Trent 700, while the GEnx-2B is lighter. The -2B, developed for the Boeing 747-8, is a conventional bleed-air engine while the -1B for the 787 is bleedless.
An A330neo with GEnx engines has strong support from AirAsia chief Tony Fernandes, whose long-haul division has just ordered another 25 A330s.
If the re-engining of the A320neo is taken as a timeframe template, an A330neo could potentially enter service in four or five years. But Airbus remains focused, for the time being, on other incremental improvements to the A330, including fuel-burn enhancements and a higher maximum take-off weight of 242t which will extend the aircraft’s range.
Source: Cirium Dashboard
