From what I gather, there have been no new orders for the Boeing 787-8 for years (the last I can recall was a top-up order for a single example by Uzbekistan in 2018). Almost all outstanding orders have now been fulfilled. There are apparently still 40 undelivered Boeing 787-8 orders in the books, but almost all of them are, realistically, paper airplanes with the airlines in question publicly stating that they have no place for them (Air Astana, Royal Jordanian for three each), have moved to the A321 (Scoot, three open examples) or are simply not realistic (10 for the Republic of Iraq). There are still 19 open orders for Boeing Capital, but I guess these are merely placeholders for any Boeing 787 variant. Early 787-8 should come on the market in increasing numbers for those second- and third-tier airlines desparate to operate the type as operators such as TUIfly are rumoured to be interested in swapping -8s for -9s.

That said, is the 787-8 still seriously pitched by Boeing in sales campaigns? Realistically, the widebody market below the 787-9 has been virtually non-existent for a couple of years. The slightly smaller A330-800 has attracted only very few orders and is still somewhat bigger than the Boeing 787-8. Any demand for an aircraft with a smaller size than the Boeing 787-9 is now apparently perfectly met by the Airbus A321XLR. A new Boeing NMA offering is probably at least a decade away, if not longer, given the delay histories of recent new passenger aircraft programmes - should it ever see the light of day if Airbus decides to throw a spanner in the works with a relatively inexpensive re-winged A322 and A323.

vfw614 wrote:

From what I gather, there have been no new orders for the Boeing 787-8 for years (the last I can recall was a top-up order for a single example by Uzbekistan in 2018). Almost all outstanding orders have now been fulfilled. There are apparently still 40 undelivered Boeing 787-8 orders in the books, but almost all of them are, realistically, paper airplanes with the airlines in question publicly stating that they have no place for them (Air Astana, Royal Jordanian for three each), have moved to the A321 (Scoot, three open examples) or are simply not realistic (10 for the Republic of Iraq). There are still 19 open orders for Boeing Capital, but I guess these are merely placeholders for any Boeing 787 variant. Early 787-8 should come on the market in increasing numbers for those second- and third-tier airlines desparate to operate the type as operators such as TUIfly are rumoured to be interested in swapping -8s for -9s.

That said, is the 787-8 still seriously pitched by Boeing in sales campaigns? Realistically, the widebody market below the 787-9 has been virtually non-existent for a couple of years. The slightly smaller A330-800 has attracted only very few orders and is still somewhat bigger than the Boeing 787-8. Any demand for an aircraft with a smaller size than the Boeing 787-9 is now apparently perfectly met by the Airbus A321XLR. A new Boeing NMA offering is probably at least a decade away, if not longer, given the delay histories of recent new passenger aircraft programmes - should it ever see the light of day if Airbus decides to throw a spanner in the works with a relatively inexpensive re-winged A322 and A323.

American Airlines has about 13 -8s still coming btw

The Boeing Capitol orders are mostly for AA.

Ok, I missed American Airlines as I was under the impression that the remaining -8s had all been converted to -9s by now. Not the case. But as Polot mentions, all or most of these are included in the above-quoted total figure if they are part of the Boeing Capital backlog of 19 (I assume that backlog also includes the five AA Boeing 787-9s that were converted from the 2018 order for 787-8s in early 2021).

That said, when those 787-8s were ordered back in 2018, it was widely seen as a big surprise (and as said above, American Airlines has since converted some -8 orders to the -9 variant). CAPA back then even commented: "Boeing would prefer to build the -9 as it is more profitable", but American wanted the -8 as a Boeing 767-300 replacement (a replacement market that hardly exists anymore as most airlines outside the US have long replaced the Boeing 767-300 as a longhaul plane)

By the way, after the AA order was placed in 2018, there was a backlog of 91 aircraft.Quite a few 787-8 orders from back then have disappeared completely, with airlines deciding not to go forward with the type altogether (Aeroflot, Icelandair, Air Niugini), not taking delivery of ordered examples (Oman Air), converting some orders to the -9 (American/Boeing Capital) or disappearing completely (ECAir). In 2021 Uzbekistan Airlines took its last ordered example, in 2020 JAL and El Al, in 2019 Bangladesh Biman, in 2018 British Airways, Royal Brunei and Avianca. Probably with the exception of RBA, none of those is a candidate for a follow-up order.

From what I gather, we can realistically expect to see another 15 or so of the outstanding order fulfilled (3 for Scoot are on the production line, the remainder is the the AA/Boeing Capital order unless there will be further conversion to -9s).

The 788 is still seriously pitched if that is what the airline absolutely wants-Boeing is not going to say no if someone wants to buy the plane. With the AA order back in 2018 Boeing did make some changes to the tail to bring further production commonality with the 789/J.

Obviously though Boeing would prefer to sell 789 and 78Js. It is the exact same story over at Airbus with the A338 vs the A339.

Sure, they will not refuse to sell the plane. My question was a little bit tongue-in-cheek. What I really meant is whether they will price it aggressively to win over airlines that are reluctant to order it or if their approach is more or less "okay, you can have it if you really want it, but we can't/won't cut you a terribly sweet deal".

And the overarching question is of course - is there a future for the 787-8 as a new-built aircraft?

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, they will not refuse to sell the plane. My question was a little bit tongue-in-cheek. What I really meant is whether they will price it aggressively to win over airlines that are reluctant to order it or if their approach is more or less "okay, you can have it if you really want it, but we can't/won't cut you a terribly sweet deal".

That depends on why the airline is reluctant to order it. Are they reluctant to order it over another Boeing model, or over a competing Airbus model?

If it is a major airline looking to place a good size order only interested in A338 or 788 Boeing will be more aggressive on 788 deals than an airline looking for a small top off waffling between a 788 or 789.

That's a good question. Is there really a competing model or is a 787-8 sized widebody simply out of fashion? The A330-800 is somewhat larger (and still does not really sell), the A321XLR significantly smaller based on a typical three-class C, PE and Y layout. A third alternative therefore could be that Boeing can make the otherwise undesirable 787-8 work for airlines if it is priced attractively enough.

I think if it upped the range game as the 762ER or 342 did to the 763ER /343 .it might find a little more success in the current market but ultimately the 789 fits more to being a direct replacement for a wider range of popular previous models 333/343/772/763 vs 788 332/762

As with anything though, the game moved on from the original version. The 9 is just a bit more flexible and the A350 is now a very serious competition for orders that wasn't around when the 8 came out

Doesn't Azerbaijan Airlines have some 787-8's on order?

The 777X is too big, the 787-8 is too small, but the A321XLR is just right!

sxf24 wrote:

The 777X is too big, the 787-8 is too small, but the A321XLR is just right!

You should read that story about three bears again. It doesn't go like that.

Some slight corrections to my initial posts - the overall breakdown of unfilled orders is as follows per Boeing:

Air Astana - 3 (RR)
ordered in 2012, delivery pushed back three times, now tentatively scheduled for 2023

Boeing Capital - 13 (GE)
those should be the remaining American Airlines frames ordered in 2018; 5 of those already had their first flight (l/n 1045, 1055, 1061, 1071, 1075), one is in final assembly (l/n 1087)

Republic of Iraq - 10 (GE)
ordered in 2010; there were reports about financing issues some years ago

Royal Jordanian - 2 (GE)
ordered in 2010; airline stated in 2018 that it can't fly additional 787s profitably

Scoot - 3 (RR)
2 currently flight testing (l/n 1015; 1065)

Unidentified - 7 (6 GE, 1 RR)
- 5 of the GE ones were ordered in 2017 and are most likely for AZAL (in 2017 AZAL announced the intention to order 4 at the Paris air show and in November that year there were reports about an order for 5. As 5 orders for GE-powered -8s were booked by Boeing in December 2017 for an unidentified customer I assume those are the AZAL frames. Nothing has been heard since about production, planned deliveries).
- the single unidentified RR frame should be the 4th EL Al 787-8 that has not been delivered officially and is stored at VCV (4X-ERD, l/n 985) .
- I have no idea about the customer for the remaining single GE frame; it was ordered in 2019 (maybe another VIP/BBJ aircraft?)

BBJ - 1 (GE)
ordered in 2019 and booked as unidentified back then.

total: 39
(Boeing lists 40 unfilled orders as a frame delivered to Uzbekistan Airways on May 4, 2021 has not been deducted yet)

I think we can assume that
- 9 will definitely be delivered as they are already in various stages of production (1x El Al, 2x Scoot, 6x American)
- 9 are pretty safe bets (7x American, 1x Scoot, 1x BBJ) unless AA switches some of its 7 yet-to-be-produced 787-8 to 787-9s,
- 10 are rather doubtful (Air Astana, AZAL, Royal Jordanian)
- 10 are pretty unlikely (Iraq)

Based on that, all unfilled 787-8 orders that are reasonably "safe" should be delivered by the end of 2022.

vfw614 wrote:

Is there really a competing model or is a 787-8 sized widebody simply out of fashion? The A330-800 is somewhat larger (and still does not really sell), the A321XLR significantly smaller based on a typical three-class C, PE and Y layout. A third alternative therefore could be that Boeing can make the otherwise undesirable 787-8 work for airlines if it is priced attractively enough.

This then begs the question..."Why doesn't Airbus price the A338 more competitively for it to be that 3rd go-to option -- to shield the A359 " -- or are they already? It seems strange to be expending resources on the former to improve its capability and be certified, only to have it languish in the cellar.

BEG2IAH wrote:

You should read that story about three bears again. It doesn't go like that.

Yeah...the first one is a whale

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, they will not refuse to sell the plane. My question was a little bit tongue-in-cheek. What I really meant is whether they will price it aggressively to win over airlines that are reluctant to order it or if their approach is more or less "okay, you can have it if you really want it, but we can't/won't cut you a terribly sweet deal".

And the overarching question is of course - is there a future for the 787-8 as a new-built aircraft?

Airplane pricing is based on revenue potential for the airlines. The 787-9 and 787-10 have the ability to bring in more revenue due to higher passenger and/or payload. Airlines have less ability to generate revenue from the 787-8 so therefore the value of the asset is less.

Pricing of airplanes is almost linear (with separate curves for narrowbody and widebody) with regards to capacity. For example 10% more capacity results in 10% higher purchase price. Manufacturing costs do not correlate directly with the pricing. A 10% increase in capacity may only cost 5% more to build. Therefore since the slopes are different, the larger planes have higher profit margins than the smaller planes. This means Airbus/Boeing are going to push the larger variants to airlines. The manufacturer also has more margin to allow discounts.

To answer your question, the manufacturers can’t price the smaller variant as aggressively since they have less profit margin. Boeing certainly will sell the 787-8, but an airline needs to have a very specific demand because if they can get 10% more seats for just 5% higher price, usually they will go for the bigger plane which has more revenue potential. The same situation happens with 737-7, A319, and A338.

The final aspect is lessors and financiers. Lessors always want the most popular plane. They don’t want orphans that are hard to remarket like the 757-300, 767-400, 717, A340-500, A330-800, etc. That forces the manufacturer to help finance the planes which adds cost. This explains why Boeing Capital is involved in the AA 787-8s.

If a post covid world has truly decreased travel demand for the years to come due to less business traffic, the 788 shouldn’t be ruled out just yet due to its small size but long range to allow airlines to remain nimble and still serve long haul flights with low demands at a high frequency. Also, I feel like the 788 may be kept because it can be a gateway aircraft for new/regional/or small airlines wanting to go long haul for the first time

Devilfish wrote:

This then begs the question..."Why doesn't Airbus price the A338 more competitively for it to be that 3rd go-to option -- to shield the A359? -- or are they already It seems strange to be expending resources on the former to improve its capability and be certified, only to have it languish in the cellar.

Sure, but I am wondering about the future market potential of the Boeing 787-8.

I think Airbus has a somewhat different tke on the market needs as it offers two widebody families that have a greater overlap between them whereas Boeing has two families that have relatively little overlap (there is a bigger capacity and capability gap between the 787-10 and the 777-8 than between the A330-900 and the A350-900).

The A321XLR isn't a good replacement for airlines with a 787-8 sized appetite.

Take AI for example, pre-pandemic, they flew their Dreamliners far and wide - from Kenya to Australia to Japan to the UK. Now can an A321 do that from a DEL hub?

It is interesting to compare the production longevity and sales of B762-200 series to the B788.

When you look at the B762 you will find that the first one was delivered in 1981 (to United) and the last B762(ER) was delivered to Piedmont in 1988. Over that period Boeing delivered a total of 249 B762's, which was actually considered a pretty good production run back in those days.

https://www.airfleets.net/listing/b767-1.htm

Now if you compare the B762 to the B788, first deliveries for the latter started in 2011 and 376 have been delivered to date here in 2021, with 40 more deliveries to go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_B ... deliveries

Much has been written on a-net about the recent manufacturing improvements making the B788 having greater commonality to the more refined B789, so I won't detail it here. Boeing engineers have also been working to "nip & tuck" out some of the unnecessary weight that was added to the early B788's needed to compensate for early design flaws. Apparently these improvements convinced AA to purchase more B788's in order to replace their aging B763ER, A332 and A333 fleets.

Will UA do like AA in order to retire the rest of their old B763ER fleet? That's worth watching, especially as Boeing continues to drag their feet with the NMA program.

However, the remaining market for the B788 will likely involve add-on's to existing fleets and probably not attract new customers. The B788 has had a decent (though unprofitable) production run and might be phased out in the next half-decade.

vfw614 wrote:

Devilfish wrote:

This then begs the question..."Why doesn't Airbus price the A338 more competitively for it to be that 3rd go-to option -- to shield the A359? -- or are they already It seems strange to be expending resources on the former to improve its capability and be certified, only to have it languish in the cellar.

Sure, but I am wondering about the future market potential of the Boeing 787-8.

I think Airbus has a somewhat different tke on the market needs as it offers two widebody families that have a greater overlap between them whereas Boeing has two families that have relatively little overlap (there is a bigger capacity and capability gap between the 787-10 and the 777-8 than between the A330-900 and the A350-900).

I'm not sure where you're going with that. Do you think more overlap is actually a good condition?

Weatherwatcher1 talked about revenue potential. There are also relevant arguments on trip cost. The 787-9 is the rare stretch that doesn't suffer a range penalty. Overall, the arguments don't appear to swing too many orders away from 787-9s.

I gotta say, I feel this thread has a click bait title.

I'd feel the same way about a topic asking if A330-800 is still seriously being pitched by Airbus.

Of course it is still being seriously pitched, your own research shows it can still be produced and still is being produced.

Boeing made the effort to move 788-specific stuff from KPAE to KCHS now that the KPAE FAL has closed.

Team B will still offer 788 to customers and engage in meaningful negotiations if they are interested in the offer.

Salesmen will sell whatever wares they think they can sell.

They might sell none, or might sell BBJs rather than airliners, but they will still offer them.

OTOH, clearly they know it's not a hot product so they won't worry about any impact from a new product optimized for the middle of the market, IMO.

A potential line up of MAX-10, NMA and 788 would provide a lot of great choices to customers.

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is interesting to compare the production longevity and sales of B762-200 series to the B788.

When you look at the B762 you will find that the first one was delivered in 1981 (to United) and the last B762(ER) was delivered to Piedmont in 1988. Over that period Boeing delivered a total of 249 B762's, which was actually considered a pretty good production run back in those days.

https://www.airfleets.net/listing/b767-1.htm

Now if you compare the B762 to the B788, first deliveries for the latter started in 2011 and 376 have been delivered to date here in 2021, with 40 more deliveries to go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_B ... deliveries

Much has been written on a-net about the recent manufacturing improvements making the B788 having greater commonality to the more refined B789, so I won't detail it here. Boeing engineers have also been working to "nip & tuck" out some of the unnecessary weight that was added to the early B788's needed to compensate for early design flaws. Apparently these improvements convinced AA to purchase more B788's in order to replace their aging B763ER, A332 and A333 fleets.

Will UA do like AA in order to retire the rest of their old B763ER fleet? That's worth watching, especially as Boeing continues to drag their feet with the NMA program.

However, the remaining market for the B788 will likely involve add-on's to existing fleets and probably not attract new customers. The B788 has had a decent (though unprofitable) production run and might be phased out in the next half-decade.

Don’t forget the later 762s that were delivered to Continental in the late 90s

Boeing has newly done design work on the 787-8. The aim was to move the advanced features from the newer 787-9 down to the 787-8 and at the same time cut production cost for the 787-8. Boeing is far away from abandoning that bird.

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, they will not refuse to sell the plane. My question was a little bit tongue-in-cheek. What I really meant is whether they will price it aggressively to win over airlines that are reluctant to order it or if their approach is more or less "okay, you can have it if you really want it, but we can't/won't cut you a terribly sweet deal".

And the overarching question is of course - is there a future for the 787-8 as a new-built aircraft?

Until recently (and perhaps they still do), Boeing would take orders for the 767-300 and still had. Quite a few LATAM 763s are quite new. I could still some orders for the 788, probably not many, but they keep the line open AFAIK. There are many enhancements now ported from the 789 to the 788 and Boeing thus has no reason to not entertain orders for the -8.

bigb wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is interesting to compare the production longevity and sales of B762-200 series to the B788.

When you look at the B762 you will find that the first one was delivered in 1981 (to United) and the last B762(ER) was delivered to Piedmont in 1988. Over that period Boeing delivered a total of 249 B762's, which was actually considered a pretty good production run back in those days.

https://www.airfleets.net/listing/b767-1.htm

Now if you compare the B762 to the B788, first deliveries for the latter started in 2011 and 376 have been delivered to date here in 2021, with 40 more deliveries to go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_B ... deliveries

Much has been written on a-net about the recent manufacturing improvements making the B788 having greater commonality to the more refined B789, so I won't detail it here. Boeing engineers have also been working to "nip & tuck" out some of the unnecessary weight that was added to the early B788's needed to compensate for early design flaws. Apparently these improvements convinced AA to purchase more B788's in order to replace their aging B763ER, A332 and A333 fleets.

Will UA do like AA in order to retire the rest of their old B763ER fleet? That's worth watching, especially as Boeing continues to drag their feet with the NMA program.

However, the remaining market for the B788 will likely involve add-on's to existing fleets and probably not attract new customers. The B788 has had a decent (though unprofitable) production run and might be phased out in the next half-decade.

Don’t forget the later 762s that were delivered to Continental in the late 90s

Indeed. Those were the only 767-200s ever built to my knowledge with the 777 Boeing Signature interior, or whatever they called it then. 10 were built and delivered to CO. They were phased out by UA very quickly post-merger.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

bigb wrote:

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is interesting to compare the production longevity and sales of B762-200 series to the B788.

When you look at the B762 you will find that the first one was delivered in 1981 (to United) and the last B762(ER) was delivered to Piedmont in 1988. Over that period Boeing delivered a total of 249 B762's, which was actually considered a pretty good production run back in those days.

https://www.airfleets.net/listing/b767-1.htm

Now if you compare the B762 to the B788, first deliveries for the latter started in 2011 and 376 have been delivered to date here in 2021, with 40 more deliveries to go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_B ... deliveries

Much has been written on a-net about the recent manufacturing improvements making the B788 having greater commonality to the more refined B789, so I won't detail it here. Boeing engineers have also been working to "nip & tuck" out some of the unnecessary weight that was added to the early B788's needed to compensate for early design flaws. Apparently these improvements convinced AA to purchase more B788's in order to replace their aging B763ER, A332 and A333 fleets.

Will UA do like AA in order to retire the rest of their old B763ER fleet? That's worth watching, especially as Boeing continues to drag their feet with the NMA program.

However, the remaining market for the B788 will likely involve add-on's to existing fleets and probably not attract new customers. The B788 has had a decent (though unprofitable) production run and might be phased out in the next half-decade.

Don’t forget the later 762s that were delivered to Continental in the late 90s

Indeed. Those were the only 767-200s ever built to my knowledge with the 777 Boeing Signature interior, or whatever they called it then. 10 were built and delivered to CO. They were phased out by UA very quickly post-merger.

That was a damn shame, too. 762 has always been my fave of the 767 series.

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, but I am wondering about the future market potential of the Boeing 787-8.

When it first came out, I thought it would be the main replacement for the older 767's or A332's. Basically the smallest size widebody for routes that don't merit anything larger, but with extra range so that it could also do longer routes the 767 couldn't. But now with the A321XLR coming out, I guess airlines are thinking, well if it doesn't require a A333 or 789 we may as well go narrowbody?

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, but I am wondering about the future market potential of the Boeing 787-8.

Similarly, I'm wondering whether Airbus is content with the A338's current market performance.

vfw614 wrote:

I think Airbus has a somewhat different tke on the market needs as it offers two widebody families that have a greater overlap between them whereas Boeing has two families that have relatively little overlap (there is a bigger capacity and capability gap between the 787-10 and the 777-8 than between the A330-900 and the A350-900).

They may well differ...however, with just a little reduction in passenger capacity, the A338 can reach more places or carry a heavier payload (niche ability, granted) the A339 cannot. Somehow, despite the excellent explanation in #15 above, I find it hard to believe that Airbus is resigned to the idea of the A338 merely being a foil to the 788, particularly given the former's added suitability as a future freighter.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, they will not refuse to sell the plane. My question was a little bit tongue-in-cheek. What I really meant is whether they will price it aggressively to win over airlines that are reluctant to order it or if their approach is more or less "okay, you can have it if you really want it, but we can't/won't cut you a terribly sweet deal".

And the overarching question is of course - is there a future for the 787-8 as a new-built aircraft?

Until recently (and perhaps they still do), Boeing would take orders for the 767-300 and still had. Quite a few LATAM 763s are quite new. I could still some orders for the 788, probably not many, but they keep the line open AFAIK. There are many enhancements now ported from the 789 to the 788 and Boeing thus has no reason to not entertain orders for the -8.

I think the difference is that the passenger aircraft sales of the 767-300 in recent years were from airlines with existing 767 fleets for which the only alternative would have been to switch to another aircraft type. Most existing 787-8 operators have quickly added -9s (and some additionally -10s) to their initial 787-8 fleets instead of topping up their order for the -8s, so should they have a need for additional airframes, more -9s instead of -8s will probably be the logical choice. The only notable exception is American Airlines (although they have already converted some -8s to -9s and are in a somewhat unique position that they still have a large 767-300 longhaul fleet).

Spiderguy252 wrote:

The A321XLR isn't a good replacement for airlines with a 787-8 sized appetite.

Take AI for example, pre-pandemic, they flew their Dreamliners far and wide - from Kenya to Australia to Japan to the UK. Now can an A321 do that from a DEL hub?

Yes, actually. The A321NEO-XLR can comfortably operate the majority of those routes - it's only Eastern Australia that would be out of reach.

Post pandemic, a reasonably large A321NEO LR/XLR order from AI would not surprise me in the slightest.

alan3 wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, but I am wondering about the future market potential of the Boeing 787-8.

When it first came out, I thought it would be the main replacement for the older 767's or A332's. Basically the smallest size widebody for routes that don't merit anything larger, but with extra range so that it could also do longer routes the 767 couldn't. But now with the A321XLR coming out, I guess airlines are thinking, well if it doesn't require a A333 or 789 we may as well go narrowbody?

The dedicated freight companies will love that switch. There’s no comparison between either of those and an A321 with pax bags and aux tanks

Revelation wrote:

I gotta say, I feel this thread has a click bait title.
I'd feel the same way about a topic asking if A330-800 is still seriously being pitched by Airbus.

Here's why I am not interested in the A330-800 (besides the fact that I find the typical "yes, but Airbus" / "yes, but Boeing" a.net-"wisdom" uninspiring): The Boeing 787 was launched in 2004, the A330neo in 2014. First deliveries of the 787-8 in.2011, of the A330-800 in 2020. The A330neo was a low-cost development never intended to be the manufacturer's bread-and-butter widebody-offering, the 787 is Boeing's main wide-body product. The A330-800 has market potential as a freighter or MRTT, the 787-8 has never branched out of the passenger airline market segment. Etc. etc..

That said, nobody disputes that the Boeing 787-8 is still produced.at this point, that 10 more will be produced in 2021/22 and Boeing will continue to offer the plane. Some facts remain however, e.g.that

(1) only two Boeing 787-8s have been ordered in the past three years by two unidentified customers (which are most likely both BBJs (one definitely is))
(2) after 2022, there are no orders left that can realistically be fulfilled.
(3) top-up orders by existing operators are not very likely, given that other than the much discussed AA order from 2018, the only top-up orders for 787-8s since 2014 were for a handful of planes by Ethiopian and JAL (and both have focused on adding 787-9s more recently).
(4) with the A321XLR, a cheaper alternative for thin long-haul routes has become available that is part of an aircraft family a lot of airlines already operate (remember the 787-8's USP a decade ago:was that it "pioneers previously undreamt of long and thin city pairs"). As a result, the Boeing 787-8 USP remains only in the relatively small ULH segment
(5) relatively young second-hand 787-8 will become available sooner than later that can cover the needs of smaller second- and third tier airlines with an appetite for the 787-8.

So yes, Boeing may still offer it, but what realistic market for the plane is left other than for BBJs?

vfw614 wrote:

So yes, Boeing may still offer it, but what realistic market for the plane is left other than for BBJs?

It doesn't matter, any more than Airbus not selling A319neo other than business jets doesn't matter either.

The production line is full with higher profit models,

At this point the smallest models just fill out the portfolio, getting additional sales is just icing on the cake.

Filling out the portfolio may, however, result in airlines being able to buy a product with lower profit for Boeing. Boeing would have loved to sell JAL, Ethiopian or American more 787-9s instead of more 787-8s. Would these customers have bought the A321neo or the A330-800 instead of more 787-9s if the 787-8s would not have been available to them? I don't think so, but apparently the risk is big enough for Boeing that such a scenario becomes reality to further invest in the Boeing 787-8 and keep it in the portfolio.

I can see the icing on the cake argument if the lower profit product opens up new markets to first time Boeing 787-8 buyers who are steadfastly uninterested in Boeing's higher profit product regardless of what deal Boeing offers. These are, however, few and far between. The last one I can think of was Air Austral with an order for 2 in 2015 and before that, Royal Air Maroc with one Boeing 787-8 in 2013 (and they quickly added only 787-9s after that). Is that business worth allowing other airlines to opt for the 787-8 if their first alternative realistically would be the 787-9? That's one of the reasons why I asked about how much effort Boeing puts into selling 787-8s by way of pricing etc.

To me the real question is, is there a market for a shrunk 787-9?

To those that may not know, the 787-8 is its own aircraft with its own smaller wing and landing gear diffrient from the -9 and -10. What if Boeing simply shrinks the -9 to the -8 size and use the same larger wing and landing gear, I mean the range would have to be nuts and the aircraft wouldn't have any limits at all for 6000NM+ missions? just guessing on that.

randomdude83 wrote:

To me the real question is, is there a market for a shrunk 787-9?

To those that may not know, the 787-8 is its own aircraft with its own smaller wing and landing gear diffrient from the -9 and -10. What if Boeing simply shrinks the -9 to the -8 size and use the same larger wing and landing gear, I mean the range would have to be nuts and the aircraft wouldn't have any limits at all for 6000NM+ missions? just guessing on that.

The 787-8 is not a shrink of the 787-9 as the 787-9 is not a plain stretch of the 787-8. The work done now should not increase the weight of the 787-8. It increases the commonality between the 787-8 and 787-9, but does not touch on for example the smaller MLG on the 787-8.

He said "what if" (...Boeing simply shrinks the -9 to the -8 size and use the same larger wing and landing gear)

vfw614 wrote:

He said "what if" (...Boeing simply shrinks the -9 to the -8 size and use the same larger wing and landing gear)

The next question would than be, why this fascination with uneconomical ultra long haul frames? The 787-8 has plenty range as it is.

vfw614 wrote:

From what I gather, there have been no new orders for the Boeing 787-8 for years (the last I can recall was a top-up order for a single example by Uzbekistan in 2018). Almost all outstanding orders have now been fulfilled. There are apparently still 40 undelivered Boeing 787-8 orders in the books, but almost all of them are, realistically, paper airplanes with the airlines in question publicly stating that they have no place for them (Air Astana, Royal Jordanian for three each), have moved to the A321 (Scoot, three open examples) or are simply not realistic (10 for the Republic of Iraq). There are still 19 open orders for Boeing Capital, but I guess these are merely placeholders for any Boeing 787 variant. Early 787-8 should come on the market in increasing numbers for those second- and third-tier airlines desparate to operate the type as operators such as TUIfly are rumoured to be interested in swapping -8s for -9s.

That said, is the 787-8 still seriously pitched by Boeing in sales campaigns? Realistically, the widebody market below the 787-9 has been virtually non-existent for a couple of years. The slightly smaller A330-800 has attracted only very few orders and is still somewhat bigger than the Boeing 787-8. Any demand for an aircraft with a smaller size than the Boeing 787-9 is now apparently perfectly met by the Airbus A321XLR. A new Boeing NMA offering is probably at least a decade away, if not longer, given the delay histories of recent new passenger aircraft programmes - should it ever see the light of day if Airbus decides to throw a spanner in the works with a relatively inexpensive re-winged A322 and A323.

Some of those 40 are part of an AA order.

vfw614 wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

Sure, they will not refuse to sell the plane. My question was a little bit tongue-in-cheek. What I really meant is whether they will price it aggressively to win over airlines that are reluctant to order it or if their approach is more or less "okay, you can have it if you really want it, but we can't/won't cut you a terribly sweet deal".

And the overarching question is of course - is there a future for the 787-8 as a new-built aircraft?

Until recently (and perhaps they still do), Boeing would take orders for the 767-300 and still had. Quite a few LATAM 763s are quite new. I could still some orders for the 788, probably not many, but they keep the line open AFAIK. There are many enhancements now ported from the 789 to the 788 and Boeing thus has no reason to not entertain orders for the -8.

I think the difference is that the passenger aircraft sales of the 767-300 in recent years were from airlines with existing 767 fleets for which the only alternative would have been to switch to another aircraft type. Most existing 787-8 operators have quickly added -9s (and some additionally -10s) to their initial 787-8 fleets instead of topping up their order for the -8s, so should they have a need for additional airframes, more -9s instead of -8s will probably be the logical choice. The only notable exception is American Airlines (although they have already converted some -8s to -9s and are in a somewhat unique position that they still have a large 767-300 longhaul fleet).

American doesn't have a 767-300 fleet. All remaining frames were retired and withdrawn from service in 2020, accelerated by a few years thanks to the pandemic. The 787-8 is essentially AA's 767-300 replacement aircraft. Some ordered 8's have been converted to 9's yes, but AA still has 8's on order and yet to be delivered.

mjoelnir wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

He said "what if" (...Boeing simply shrinks the -9 to the -8 size and use the same larger wing and landing gear)

The next question would than be, why this fascination with uneconomical ultra long haul frames? The 787-8 has plenty range as it is.

I was thinking the same thing. 788 is a great aircraft as is. Think of it as a 752 in that it has better hot/high performance and better climb/initial cruise altitude performance than the 789 or 7810.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

vfw614 wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Until recently (and perhaps they still do), Boeing would take orders for the 767-300 and still had. Quite a few LATAM 763s are quite new. I could still some orders for the 788, probably not many, but they keep the line open AFAIK. There are many enhancements now ported from the 789 to the 788 and Boeing thus has no reason to not entertain orders for the -8.

I think the difference is that the passenger aircraft sales of the 767-300 in recent years were from airlines with existing 767 fleets for which the only alternative would have been to switch to another aircraft type. Most existing 787-8 operators have quickly added -9s (and some additionally -10s) to their initial 787-8 fleets instead of topping up their order for the -8s, so should they have a need for additional airframes, more -9s instead of -8s will probably be the logical choice. The only notable exception is American Airlines (although they have already converted some -8s to -9s and are in a somewhat unique position that they still have a large 767-300 longhaul fleet).

American doesn't have a 767-300 fleet. All remaining frames were retired and withdrawn from service in 2020, accelerated by a few years thanks to the pandemic. The 787-8 is essentially AA's 767-300 replacement aircraft. Some ordered 8's have been converted to 9's yes, but AA still has 8's on order and yet to be delivered.

It should have read „had“ - I was talking about three years ago when the AA order was placed.

vfw614 wrote:

Revelation wrote:

I gotta say, I feel this thread has a click bait title.
I'd feel the same way about a topic asking if A330-800 is still seriously being pitched by Airbus.

Here's why I am not interested in the A330-800 (besides the fact that I find the typical "yes, but Airbus" / "yes, but Boeing" a.net-"wisdom" uninspiring): The Boeing 787 was launched in 2004, the A330neo in 2014. First deliveries of the 787-8 in.2011, of the A330-800 in 2020. The A330neo was a low-cost development never intended to be the manufacturer's bread-and-butter widebody-offering, the 787 is Boeing's main wide-body product. The A330-800 has market potential as a freighter or MRTT, the 787-8 has never branched out of the passenger airline market segment. Etc. etc..

That said, nobody disputes that the Boeing 787-8 is still produced.at this point, that 10 more will be produced in 2021/22 and Boeing will continue to offer the plane. Some facts remain however, e.g.that

(1) only two Boeing 787-8s have been ordered in the past three years by two unidentified customers (which are most likely both BBJs (one definitely is))
(2) after 2022, there are no orders left that can realistically be fulfilled.
(3) top-up orders by existing operators are not very likely, given that other than the much discussed AA order from 2018, the only top-up orders for 787-8s since 2014 were for a handful of planes by Ethiopian and JAL (and both have focused on adding 787-9s more recently).
(4) with the A321XLR, a cheaper alternative for thin long-haul routes has become available that is part of an aircraft family a lot of airlines already operate (remember the 787-8's USP a decade ago:was that it "pioneers previously undreamt of long and thin city pairs"). As a result, the Boeing 787-8 USP remains only in the relatively small ULH segment
(5) relatively young second-hand 787-8 will become available sooner than later that can cover the needs of smaller second- and third tier airlines with an appetite for the 787-8.

So yes, Boeing may still offer it, but what realistic market for the plane is left other than for BBJs?

As I mentioned earlier, the market for the 787-8 is small just like it is for the A330-800 since for not much more money airlines can upgauge to the 787-9 and A339 which has the ability to bring in much more revenue over the course of the ownership of the airplane.

The biggest competition for the 787-8 is the 787-9 (not A321XLR). In the vast majority of business cases developed by airlines, the larger plane that can bring in more revenue than the marginal cost of a higher purchase price wins out. Airlines forecast growing, not shrinking over the 20 year operational life of the plane, so the bigger plane with more potential usually is the better choice. It’s also the better choice for the manufacturer since it has a higher profit margin.

Pitched or perhaps, how many -8s have to be produced a year to keep its unique supply chain going?

FLALEFTY wrote:

It is interesting to compare the production longevity and sales of B762-200 series to the B788.

When you look at the B762 you will find that the first one was delivered in 1981 (to United) and the last B762(ER) was delivered to Piedmont in 1988. Over that period Boeing delivered a total of 249 B762's, which was actually considered a pretty good production run back in those days.

https://www.airfleets.net/listing/b767-1.htm

Now if you compare the B762 to the B788, first deliveries for the latter started in 2011 and 376 have been delivered to date here in 2021, with 40 more deliveries to go.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_B ... deliveries

Much has been written on a-net about the recent manufacturing improvements making the B788 having greater commonality to the more refined B789, so I won't detail it here. Boeing engineers have also been working to "nip & tuck" out some of the unnecessary weight that was added to the early B788's needed to compensate for early design flaws. Apparently these improvements convinced AA to purchase more B788's in order to replace their aging B763ER, A332 and A333 fleets.

Will UA do like AA in order to retire the rest of their old B763ER fleet? That's worth watching, especially as Boeing continues to drag their feet with the NMA program.

However, the remaining market for the B788 will likely involve add-on's to existing fleets and probably not attract new customers. The B788 has had a decent (though unprofitable) production run and might be phased out in the next half-decade.

CO and LY both took 762ERs in the 90s.

Also, the 788 hasn't been unprofitable. You don't look at an airplane family, particularly from the same generation, by subtype. You look at the program as a whole.

N1120A wrote:

CO and LY both took 762ERs in the 90s.

2000-2001 for the CO 762s... it was an interesting decision!

Was there another version of the 787 that was a little smaller that was proposed.

frmrCapCadet wrote:

Pitched or perhaps, how many -8s have to be produced a year to keep its unique supply chain going?

What parts are unique? It isn't as if the difference is that of the 737NG vs MAX. Or 747-200 vs 747-400.

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Indeed. Those were the only 767-200s ever built to my knowledge with the 777 Boeing Signature interior, or whatever they called it then. 10 were built and delivered to CO.

Uzbekistan Airways also took new 762ERs with the Signature Interior.

LAX772LR wrote:

ContinentalEWR wrote:

Indeed. Those were the only 767-200s ever built to my knowledge with the 777 Boeing Signature interior, or whatever they called it then. 10 were built and delivered to CO.

Uzbekistan Airways also took new 762ERs with the Signature Interior.

Uzbekistan Airways has never operated the 762. They have late build 763ERs, with signature interior as you note.