Source:
@TonyFernandes (CEO Air Asia) has just confirmed the airline has no plans to buy the Airbus #A350 XWB — despite having 10 of them on (firm) order.

• AirAsiaX also has 66 #A330neo aircraft on firm order

• Final decision on AirAsiaX’s future fleet is expected later this year



So by the looks of it A350 cancelled. A330neo order in its totality not certain. Possible B787 as previously suggested but unlikely?

did he give a reason why he didn't want them? Part of a change to the airlines business model or was it something to do with the plane itself?

Having 10 A350s next to the A330 fleet seems to make no sense for Air Aisa's network.

This is Air Asia X.. an airline that seems to change its strategy every few months.

The amount of times it has stated it will grow frequencies only to not long after instead cut them on its network is just too hard to follow.

Their fleet decision making process seems just as hard to read.

He said a few weeks ago that the A330-900 test figures were exceeding their expectations and they would want more of them. By implication they no longer need the A350.

Geoff

The A350s were ordered long before the A339 was launched. At the time of the order, the A350 was the logical replacement for the A333.

When Airbus launched the A339, Tony Fernandes claimed credit for pushing Airbus into it - at the time of signing the launch order, Fernandes said that it is the aircraft that they have been asking Airbus to build. As the Airasia X network consists mainly of flights not exceeding 10 hours, the A339 will be sufficient and it does not cost as much as the A359. So it is logical that they cancelled it.

But things change fast in the aviation industry. Come back in another year and we may have another story to discuss!

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

I kinda hope not. TBH I really get sick of the 787. Too many of them flying around and they're way too over hyped. I've been on them heaps of times and don't really notice a difference between them and other aircraft, or anything they've been advertising about them. I know they work well for airlines but I just like variation.

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

Only if the price is right. I suspect that Airbus will no longer sit idly this time and will compete strongly with whatever Boeing will be offering Airasia X. This will be a huge order to lose and will also mean that the A330Neo programme may sink!

LoganTheBogan wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

I kinda hope not. TBH I really get sick of the 787. Too many of them flying around and they're way too over hyped. I've been on them heaps of times and don't really notice a difference between them and other aircraft, or anything they've been advertising about them. I know they work well for airlines but I just like variation.

Airasia X won't be able to do 10 abreast seating on the B787.... so, they can compete better with legacy carriers. That may be the reason why they are looking at it. Another reason is Tony Fernandes is a GE fanboy. With GE being instrumental in helping Boeing swing the orders from AA and HA, that puts Boeing in a pretty strong position.

But if Airasia X values fleet commonality as much as AA, they will stick with Airbus.

Given that their 350s were going to be 10 abreast I don't think any passenger will be crying over it.

LoganTheBogan wrote:

I kinda hope not.

Actually Air Asia X is one of these rare cases where the change from 350 to 787 is good news: it goes from an unbearably uncomfortable to just a very uncomfortable plane.

IndianicWorld wrote:

This is Air Asia X.. an airline that seems to change its strategy every few months.

The amount of times it has stated it will grow frequencies only to not long after instead cut them on its network is just too hard to follow.

Their fleet decision making process seems just as hard to read.

Really easy in my view.
As has been pointed out it was Air Asia X that pushed Airbus into the A330NEO in the first place.
There was always a concern that the 242T A330-900 would be challenged between the likes of KUL and LHR.
The launch of the 251T A330-900 clearly removes any need for a sub-fleet of A359's in a fleet that will be focussed around the A330 as a type.

Rgds

workhorse wrote:

Given that their 350s were going to be 10 abreast I don't think any passenger will be crying over it.

And the A330 is 9 abreast so not much better.

The only time passengers will be pleased about the comfort of a 9 abreast B787.

george77300 wrote:

workhorse wrote:

Given that their 350s were going to be 10 abreast I don't think any passenger will be crying over it.

And the A330 is 9 abreast so not much better.

The only time passengers will be pleased about the comfort of a 9 abreast B787.

But not even the 787 can beat that one on casm

olle wrote:

george77300 wrote:

workhorse wrote:

Given that their 350s were going to be 10 abreast I don't think any passenger will be crying over it.

And the A330 is 9 abreast so not much better.

The only time passengers will be pleased about the comfort of a 9 abreast B787.

But not even the 787 can beat that one on casm

With their configuration on a B787-10 would be very close surely to the A333/A339.

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/new ... 783949.cms

It is blindingly obvious Fernandes wants a price reduction....

"The A350 is not an aircraft we will buy," AirAsia X co-group CEO Tony Fernandes said in a Facebook Live chat from London. "Too expensive. Fares would go up."

He would not cancel the a339 after pushing Airbus to launch it. If he does so he will likely lose any future favorable terms on the a32x he likes to keep buying.

Is the 351t A339 able to do KL to Europe without compromises with a full 9-abreast pax load?

If not, and assuming they stick with Airbus, there may be an opening for a few A338s amongst the 66 A330s on order. (They ordered a few A332s a few years ago, but did not take them).

JerseyFlyer wrote:

Is the 351t A339 able to do KL to Europe without compromises with a full 9-abreast pax load?

If not, and assuming they stick with Airbus, there may be an opening for a few A338s amongst the 66 A330s on order. (They ordered a few A332s a few years ago, but did not take them).

I remember from before but not sure completely that KL to London and far west Europe would not quite be possible full load but other parts of Europe would be fine. Overall quite borderline especially West with a combination of weather/wind could be difficult.

george77300 wrote:

workhorse wrote:

Given that their 350s were going to be 10 abreast I don't think any passenger will be crying over it.

And the A330 is 9 abreast so not much better.

The only time passengers will be pleased about the comfort of a 9 abreast B787.

If AirAsia can put nine across seating in an aircraft where every one else has eight across, an AirAsia 787 order could revolve around a paradigm shifting ten across seating configuration.

I am not too sure of many passengers who would be pleased with that.

Step 1 accomplished for Boeing. Now they will give everything they have to persuade Air Asia X to switch to dreamliner. It will be interesting to watch. If it is very obvious they will keep the Neo order, then why is there a need for a final decision on fleet ? This order is alot more then selling dreamliners, it is about killing 330neo.

travelhound wrote:

george77300 wrote:

workhorse wrote:

Given that their 350s were going to be 10 abreast I don't think any passenger will be crying over it.

And the A330 is 9 abreast so not much better.

The only time passengers will be pleased about the comfort of a 9 abreast B787.

If AirAsia can put nine across seating in an aircraft where every one else has eight across, an AirAsia 787 order could revolve around a paradigm shifting ten across seating configuration.

I am not too sure of many passengers who would be pleased with that.

if the fares are low enough they won't care

flee wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

Only if the price is right. I suspect that Airbus will no longer sit idly this time and will compete strongly with whatever Boeing will be offering Airasia X. This will be a huge order to lose and will also mean that the A330Neo programme may sink!

Where's John Leahy when you really need him?

ap305 wrote:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/business/airasia-x-wont-buy-too-expensive-airbus-a350-tony-fernandes/articleshow/63783949.cms

It is blindingly obvious Fernandes wants a price reduction....

"The A350 is not an aircraft we will buy," AirAsia X co-group CEO Tony Fernandes said in a Facebook Live chat from London. "Too expensive. Fares would go up."

He would not cancel the a339 after pushing Airbus to launch it. If he does so he will likely lose any future favorable terms on the a32x he likes to keep buying.

Either that, or he's getting back in to F1 racing and needs someone to pay him millions of dollars to put their logos on the car.

It's a shame no one informed Fernandes of the A350's price till now.

JerseyFlyer wrote:

Is the 351t A339 able to do KL to Europe without compromises with a full 9-abreast pax load?

If not, and assuming they stick with Airbus, there may be an opening for a few A338s amongst the 66 A330s on order. (They ordered a few A332s a few years ago, but did not take them).

The 351t A339 would perhaps reach any destination in the world without restrictions

I know you mean the 251t A339, I just couldn't resist

The 242t A339 certainly wasn't able to reach Western Europa in AirAsiaX configuration. The 251t version apparently is very close in tange to the 77E, so should be able reach Western Europe, making the A359 unnecessary.

But I don't understand this 'final decision on future fleet' stuff. They already have launch pricing on the A330neo, Fernandez confirmed he was completely reassured by Airbus about the A330neo just a few months ago, and was sure they had the right aircraft on order (and IMO too). Why these flirts with Boeing?

So it is not ok for him to play one OEM off against the other?
Imagine what will happen when the Russians and Chinese attempt to break the duopoly.....

LoganTheBogan wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

I kinda hope not. TBH I really get sick of the 787. Too many of them flying around and they're way too over hyped. I've been on them heaps of times and don't really notice a difference between them and other aircraft, or anything they've been advertising about them. I know they work well for airlines but I just like variation.

Flying the 787 as a pilot, I do notice a small difference, compared to my previous aircraft type, but I agree that the 787 is overhyped for what it is. I especially have noticed that many interior parts feel flimsy and in the cockpit too.

IMHO Boeing has 3 things going for them right now:

*A higher production rate that allows them to secure future deliveries . (Clearing of the backlog is helping a lot)
*Better pricing than past 787 campaigns
*Seizing the opportunity of the change of leadership at Airbus. Leahy out of the way is a big plus for them.

After having their "guns" full and ready to shoot, they found the easiest targets (AA was not difficult to secure, HA feeling awkward as the sole 338 customer) and secured the deals. Congrats to them and well done. Both companies have amazing planes on offer and as always some you loose, some you win. Personally I don't believe D7 is that easy to flip, would sure make huge headlines (and huge bonuses to the Boeing guy that secures that) but as others before have stated, the A359 was an oddball in the current fleet plans. The 251t A339 should be the best option for them.
*

Final decision on future fleet could equally mean exercising or bettering that launch pricing and increasing the A330NEO order. As these would presumably have available dates attached then Air Asia X would need to see what Airbus is offering.
Cancelling the A350 about now might coincide with the start of any continuing payments or other commitments.

Not surprised, why you need A350 when you have A330neo, but well only 10 A350's would not have been that bad.

frigatebird wrote:

JerseyFlyer wrote:

Is the 351t A339 able to do KL to Europe without compromises with a full 9-abreast pax load?

If not, and assuming they stick with Airbus, there may be an opening for a few A338s amongst the 66 A330s on order. (They ordered a few A332s a few years ago, but did not take them).

The 351t A339 would perhaps reach any destination in the world without restrictions

I know you mean the 251t A339, I just couldn't resist

The 242t A339 certainly wasn't able to reach Western Europa in AirAsiaX configuration. The 251t version apparently is very close in tange to the 77E, so should be able reach Western Europe, making the A359 unnecessary.

But I don't understand this 'final decision on future fleet' stuff. They already have launch pricing on the A330neo, Fernandez confirmed he was completely reassured by Airbus about the A330neo just a few months ago, and was sure they had the right aircraft on order (and IMO too). Why these flirts with Boeing?

I think Airasia X may be able to get out of the A339 order because its delivery dates have slipped due to the RR engine delays. So Airbus are already in breach of contract. That is why they are now trying to drive a hard bargain, now that JL is gone....

astuteman wrote:

IndianicWorld wrote:

This is Air Asia X.. an airline that seems to change its strategy every few months.

The amount of times it has stated it will grow frequencies only to not long after instead cut them on its network is just too hard to follow.

Their fleet decision making process seems just as hard to read.

Really easy in my view.
As has been pointed out it was Air Asia X that pushed Airbus into the A330NEO in the first place.
There was always a concern that the 242T A330-900 would be challenged between the likes of KUL and LHR.
The launch of the 251T A330-900 clearly removes any need for a sub-fleet of A359's in a fleet that will be focused around the A330 as a type.

Rgds

I must concur here, strongly. It's not so much so that Air Asia X's needs and desires have changed, but rather more practically - that Airbus's products have changed based on the demands of the market and in response to fuel economics. Considering their long-haul history with Airbus products (A343, A333, A350, A339) - I can see that as the products matured to better meet their needs - they have refined their ordering to reflect that. The A339 is impressive in that regard, with the MTOW pushes, it can have the range - and still be versatile enough to perform regional routes as well - and well positioned subsidiaries would thus extend the range of the A339 to be capable of one-stop expansions into the last vestiges of what were their former A359 needs anyway.

If the business case merits it, open an AirAsiaX Japan (or 'invest' in a local entity, say - Skymark), put some A339s there and fly Trans-Pacific to the U.S. Where else would they have needed the range of the A359?

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

No.

imthedreamliner wrote:

Step 1 accomplished for Boeing. Now they will give everything they have to persuade Air Asia X to switch to dreamliner. It will be interesting to watch. If it is very obvious they will keep the Neo order, then why is there a need for a final decision on fleet ? This order is alot more then selling dreamliners, it is about killing 330neo.

A final decision is needed because last year Air Asia X was contemplating switching the entire NEO order to A350s. And it really doesn't make sense to operate 10 A350s alongside the large NEO order. This is likely just a bargaining ploy for better pricing from Airbus. I'll eat crow if I have to, but this is not going to Boeing. There would be huge penalties to pay.

If they change it really comes down to the economics of operating the 787-10 of which Airbus doesn’t have an equivalent. The 789 should be able to basically run the same seating layout as an A339neo. It’s a bit less long but seems to taper less in the back end so it should be pretty close.

The 10 would give you an extra 50 seats or so I would think provided the range works on your most dense routes and you can fill the planes. The 9 would give you a bit more range than the A339neo as well. Having the two gives you flexibility to control your capacity that you can’t get with just the A330neo unless you want to take the 338.

It should be interesting to watch. I have to think financing terms play a big role in things and at this point you will get better rates on a 787 than an A330neo unless sales start to pickup.

Slug71 wrote:

A final decision is needed because last year Air Asia X was contemplating switching the entire NEO order to A350s. And it really doesn't make sense to operate 10 A350s alongside the large NEO order. This is likely just a bargaining ploy for better pricing from Airbus. I'll eat crow if I have to, but this is not going to Boeing. There would be huge penalties to pay.

Not necessarily considering RR issues.

ap305 wrote:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/business/airasia-x-wont-buy-too-expensive-airbus-a350-tony-fernandes/articleshow/63783949.cms

It is blindingly obvious Fernandes wants a price reduction....

"The A350 is not an aircraft we will buy," AirAsia X co-group CEO Tony Fernandes said in a Facebook Live chat from London. "Too expensive. Fares would go up."

He would not cancel the a339 after pushing Airbus to launch it. If he does so he will likely lose any future favorable terms on the a32x he likes to keep buying.

It is all about price. Why wouldn't the cancel the A339 for the right price on the 789/787-10?

All indications are that Boeing is selling 787s for $10 million or so less than before. Any airline not renegotiating is being silly.

Lightsaber

frigatebird wrote:

But I don't understand this 'final decision on future fleet' stuff. They already have launch pricing on the A330neo, Fernandez confirmed he was completely reassured by Airbus about the A330neo just a few months ago, and was sure they had the right aircraft on order (and IMO too). Why these flirts with Boeing?

It may be as simple as the replacement of the 10 cancelled A350s.

My recollection is they initially ordered 50 A339s, quickly increased that to 55. Then they converted 11 A333s to A339s, making 66 total. Adding another 10 to replace the A359s would be a simple change, but of course it could be more complex than that. Circa 76 frames is worth a renegotiation!

bigjku wrote:

If they change it really comes down to the economics of operating the 787-10 of which Airbus doesn’t have an equivalent. The 789 should be able to basically run the same seating layout as an A339neo. It’s a bit less long but seems to taper less in the back end so it should be pretty close.

The 10 would give you an extra 50 seats or so I would think provided the range works on your most dense routes and you can fill the planes. The 9 would give you a bit more range than the A339neo as well. Having the two gives you flexibility to control your capacity that you can’t get with just the A330neo unless you want to take the 338.

It should be interesting to watch. I have to think financing terms play a big role in things and at this point you will get better rates on a 787 than an A330neo unless sales start to pickup.

Don't forget that D7 uses 9ab in the A333 and will do so on the A339. That narrows the gap on the 78's economics. The 251T A339 also closes the capability gap, albeit the 789 is still going to be much better. One thing though: we haven't seen Boeing going low on the prices for the 78X yet, and I recall that some airlines a few years back were complaining about the price being too high, which makes sense to a degree as Boeing would likely want to retain good yields for the highest yielding aircraft in the family per unit.

Don't think the A350 had ever made sense on their fleet.

MrHMSH wrote:

bigjku wrote:

If they change it really comes down to the economics of operating the 787-10 of which Airbus doesn’t have an equivalent. The 789 should be able to basically run the same seating layout as an A339neo. It’s a bit less long but seems to taper less in the back end so it should be pretty close.

The 10 would give you an extra 50 seats or so I would think provided the range works on your most dense routes and you can fill the planes. The 9 would give you a bit more range than the A339neo as well. Having the two gives you flexibility to control your capacity that you can’t get with just the A330neo unless you want to take the 338.

It should be interesting to watch. I have to think financing terms play a big role in things and at this point you will get better rates on a 787 than an A330neo unless sales start to pickup.

Don't forget that D7 uses 9ab in the A333 and will do so on the A339. That narrows the gap on the 78's economics. The 251T A339 also closes the capability gap, albeit the 789 is still going to be much better. One thing though: we haven't seen Boeing going low on the prices for the 78X yet, and I recall that some airlines a few years back were complaining about the price being too high, which makes sense to a degree as Boeing would likely want to retain good yields for the highest yielding aircraft in the family per unit.

I don’t. That’s the only reason it’s really competive honestly. You do still on the current A333 see them taper down the back of the cabin to less seats, something that other airlines aren’t having to do on 787. So I think the 9’s couple feet shorter work out to about a wash on seating with the A339neo.

That is what it really comes down to in my view is your statement they haven’t sold discounted 10’s yet. That is where the question lies. If Air Asia thinks they could fill the 10 on many routes a 9/10 combo makes sense if the price is right. If they can’t fill he seats or the planes cost to much the A339neo makes the most sense. Maybe even the A338 makes sense if the range works out for them where the other doesn’t. I suspect part of the issue getting a338 would be finding financing right now that makes it work.

I see Air Asia's chance of going to the Dreamliner as slim to none

LoganTheBogan wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

I kinda hope not. TBH I really get sick of the 787. Too many of them flying around and they're way too over hyped. I've been on them heaps of times and don't really notice a difference between them and other aircraft, or anything they've been advertising about them. I know they work well for airlines but I just like variation.

Funny, when I go to Asia I feel the same about the A330. They are like the official bird of Asia.

To be the difference with the 787 is felt on the long segments, but thats me.

Excellent, this almost certainly means more A330neo.

787Driver wrote:

LoganTheBogan wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

I kinda hope not. TBH I really get sick of the 787. Too many of them flying around and they're way too over hyped. I've been on them heaps of times and don't really notice a difference between them and other aircraft, or anything they've been advertising about them. I know they work well for airlines but I just like variation.

Flying the 787 as a pilot, I do notice a small difference, compared to my previous aircraft type, but I agree that the 787 is overhyped for what it is. I especially have noticed that many interior parts feel flimsy and in the cockpit too.

I'm not sure how long of flights you two are doing with the 787, but I fly to Asia a lot so 10-12 hours is the norm I am on that aircraft, I feel 10 times better arriving at my destination than I do when I'm on a 777 or 747, can't speak for the Airbus really except for the A340-600 as that is the only long haul I have done on the airbus, but that difference in cabin pressure makes a ton of difference on my body personally

What model does Air Asia X use? That will tell you if they will cancel the 330neo. If they use a quick turnover model of only operating aircraft for ten year or if they will keep the aircraft for 20+ years? If they intended to lease a large portion of aircraft or will operate them as an airline?

With Delta as a comparison we know they will hold aircraft for 20+ years and operate them in Delta. If Air Asia X is using a more short term and lease centric model then those factor into descion to purchase. Both can impose additional cost beyond purchase price and may render the purchase no longer viable.

It's all speculation of course.

as739x wrote:

Funny, when I go to Asia I feel the same about the A330. They are like the official bird of Asia.

The fact is that the A330 is the WorkHorse of Asia. It makes a tonne of money for airlines like Malaysia, Singapore Air, KoreanAir, China Airlines, Thai, Cathay, Eva, the CN3 etc.

imthedreamliner wrote:

Step 1 accomplished for Boeing. Now they will give everything they have to persuade Air Asia X to switch to dreamliner. It will be interesting to watch. If it is very obvious they will keep the Neo order, then why is there a need for a final decision on fleet ? This order is alot more then selling dreamliners, it is about killing 330neo.

It's a bit premature on killing A330NEO. There are still many airlines that need to have their old A330-300 replaced. If Airbus is desperate enough to offer cut-throat prices (which it can do that profitably because A330NEO development cost is incremental), many of them may be tempted to get some -900. Prime candidate would be airlines like CX, CI, PR or MH, where they fly a substantial fleet of A330-300, but have no 787 orders. Thai and Korean could be in the play too, as they tend to order a bit of everything.

And then there are the Chinese carriers. If Airbus allows China to manufacture/assemble A330NEO, then there will be 100+ orders immediately. It's easy for CA, MU, HU and CZ to each take 20 to 30, and actually filling the planes. Airbus is already assembling A320 and A330CEO in China, getting the A330NEO assembled there is not a huge deal. Airbus will guard the A350 closely, but not A330NEO.

raylee67 wrote:

imthedreamliner wrote:

Step 1 accomplished for Boeing. Now they will give everything they have to persuade Air Asia X to switch to dreamliner. It will be interesting to watch. If it is very obvious they will keep the Neo order, then why is there a need for a final decision on fleet ? This order is alot more then selling dreamliners, it is about killing 330neo.

It's a bit premature on killing A330NEO. There are still many airlines that need to have their old A330-300 replaced. If Airbus is desperate enough to offer cut-throat prices (which it can do that profitably because A330NEO development cost is incremental), many of them may be tempted to get some -900. Prime candidate would be airlines like CX, CI, PR or MH, where they fly a substantial fleet of A330-300, but have no 787 orders. Thai and Korean could be in the play too, as they tend to order a bit of everything.

And then there are the Chinese carriers. If Airbus allows China to manufacture/assemble A330NEO, then there will be 100+ orders immediately. It's easy for CA, MU, HU and CZ to each take 20 to 30, and actually filling the planes. Airbus is already assembling A320 and A330CEO in China, getting the A330NEO assembled there is not a huge deal. Airbus will guard the A350 closely, but not A330NEO.

Airbus is not assembling any A330s in China. The A330s are assembled in Toulouse then flown to Tianjin for completion of cabin. It would be stupid for Airbus to assemble the A330 in China, which is the world's largest photocopier machine.

bigjku wrote:

I don’t. That’s the only reason it’s really competive honestly.

That and the commonality with large A330 customer base, some availability advantages, the low purchase price and having the super tight economy option available. Other airlines may disagree that the A339 is competitive only with 9ab.

You do still on the current A333 see them taper down the back of the cabin to less seats, something that other airlines aren’t having to do on 787. So I think the 9’s couple feet shorter work out to about a wash on seating with the A339neo.

The seating may be a wash, I can easily see it, but the A339's average fuel burn per hour may actually be a touch lower than the 789's. A fuel consumption table from last year gives the A333 a fuel burn of 5700kg/h, compared to 5600kg/h for the 789. Not hard to imagine the A339 will cut down on that figure, so if the seat count is very similar then the efficiency may actually be very close indeed, giving the 787 little if any advantage for D7's configuration.

That is what it really comes down to in my view is your statement they haven’t sold discounted 10’s yet. That is where the question lies. If Air Asia thinks they could fill the 10 on many routes a 9/10 combo makes sense if the price is right. If they can’t fill he seats or the planes cost to much the A339neo makes the most sense. Maybe even the A338 makes sense if the range works out for them where the other doesn’t. I suspect part of the issue getting a338 would be finding financing right now that makes it work.

Boeing will have to work a lot harder on price, it's one thing competing against the A338 when it's an orphan model at HA and AA had similar reservations, and another to be competing against an exclusive Airbus operator with a long and strong historic relationship. Bear in mind the CEO has been assured of the A339's performance and numbers and was satisfied (if I read it correctly). I doubt D7 will buy the A338, they seem content with focusing on Asia and Australia, with the possible exception of Western Europe the A339 has more than enough range for what D7 is planning.

LoganTheBogan wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Another huge win for the Dreamliner coming?

I kinda hope not. TBH I really get sick of the 787. Too many of them flying around and they're way too over hyped. I've been on them heaps of times and don't really notice a difference between them and other aircraft, or anything they've been advertising about them. I know they work well for airlines but I just like variation.

Substitute any Airbus in your comment, and 1/2 the people will agree. There's nothing wrong with the 787 and it's sales seem to reflect that.

AirAsia X team is currently now in the US. Can't say anything more than that. 787 souvenirs distributed in office recently. Does it constitutes to anything? I can't comment.