Go to our sponsor betterhelp.com/explanes for 10% off your first month of therapy with BetterHelp and get matched with a therapist who will listen and help.
The A350 is saddled with an engine that has a premature life on the wing. For the Trent XWB engine on the 350, the time between overhauls is premature. HPT; ( High Pressure Turbine ) blades and IPC; (Intermediate Compressor ) blades do not last as long as designed. Some only last 2,000 - 3,000 cycles with an on-wing time of only three years in many instances. For the current line-up of Trent 900, 1000 & XWB; these engines struggle to go 4 years before they need to be removed for overhaul. The EP3 build standard for the Trent 900 which RR refuses to improve needs an overhaul every 4 to 5 years, or about 3,500 cycles which is premature for an engine which has been in service since 2008. Abnormal wear to engine blades in the IPC of engines. Rolls-Royce previously had to take action after abnormal wear was spotted in its Trent 1000 family. This saw many aircraft grounded, pending engine checks, and maintenance. Rolls Royce is treading lightly after a previous issue affecting its Trent 1000 engine cost airlines billions of dollars. Three variants of this engine have been affected by corrosion issues. On another note, Al Nippon and Air New Zealand have dropped RR engines to power their future 787 orders in favor of the superior GEnx engines which are outselling RR by a margin of almost three to one. More airlines are likely to follow this trend.
So, basically Airbus make a plane that's cheaper to run, with a longer range, that's less likely to fall out of the sky, with a lower sticker price, and can deliver it sooner.
it has to be mentioned too, that KLM are planning on retiring their rather small A330 fleet, so these pilots will have a shorter and easier conversion. plus it proves KLM has been flying Airbus before.. also they ordered a lot of Airbus narrowbodies and are going to use maintenance facilities of AirFrance. lastly, it is not a total turnaround as they are already flying 787s.
However, if they are killing the a330 fleet you could expect them to do the same to the 787 as these are direct competitors (and the 787 / a350 are not)
@@davidesquer1312and yet, airlines plan their fleets on a spectrum of 10/15 years (minimum)...no orders of 787 signal KLM is moving on a different direction and way from both the a330 (which they are replacing) and the 787 in the future...obviously the 787s wont be retired anytime soon...but I wouldn't be surprised if in 10 years time there was no increase in the number of 787 on service at KLM
Totally agree. In B787 and B777 (in 3-4-3) I’m always contemplating to upgrade to premium economy because of the narrow seats. No need for that on the A350.
the A380 is the only aircraft I found which is OK in economy. the 787 in 9 abreast and 777 in 10 abreast is miserable with the right shoulder room. I'm trying the a350 next month but I can't see it being much better
Also considering their already permanent top of the chart incident in history, It probably was wise to let the 737max stay right where it is😅😅😅 @@bernardmueller5676
Having flown on the 787 with BA and on the A350 with Cathay Pacific there is no doubt the A350 is a superior aircraft and extremely quiet on a long haul flight
KLM did the right thing IMO for all of the reasons you went through. The Boeing of today is a company one can't count on for engineering or manufacturing quality. Once upon a time Boeing led the world in designing and making complex aircraft. But, the money first guys took over and destroyed the engineering integrity of the company. Airbus isn't perfect, but they are more trustworthy than Boeing.
100%. Airbus might have their flaws but they're waaaay more trustworthy than that corrupt amalgamation of a creature whatever you call current day 'boeing'. They should have never merged with Mcdouglas
I worked on Airbus aircraft since the introduction of the A300 and I was always impressed with their quality and innovative design. Boeing simply lack their former dedication to superb quality and they have sacrificed this in order to satisfy shareholders. The 787 is testimony to that.
The 787 changed the entire airplane industry forever, you must remember they started the 787 project all the way back in 2003 when even the A380 hadn't taken off. So if we compare the success of the 787 in terms of being able to guess where the flight industry was going, Boeing got it completely right back then as the A380s are almost retired at only 20 years after release. It was an incredibly innovative airline - the first with albatross style wings, the first with the new era of engines and so many other things that no other planes were doing at the time. just because it gets out done by the a350 today, which is a much newer plane, doesn't mean it wasn't innovative back then
Amsterdam - Jakarta is a very big route for KLM, and i think the A350 can do that route without stopping while it's pushing it for the 787, so that is also a huge factor.
@@chengyoujiang6076 Or the Dutch used to have a monopoly at the Spice Islands for I believe it was nutmeg, and fought the British over this lucrative spice? ;)
@@protonneutron9046 But you can't explain why Air France has been so reluctant to 35K, and had a significant size of 787 order before the group CEO Ben Smith swapped them with A350s. Meanwhile KLM managements had ordered A350 once way back in 2013, and also insisted in A350 this time according to some rumors. Ben Smith on the other hand actually favoured more 787s to KLM.
Interestingly, KLM had a smaller A350 order in the past but back then AF and KLM switched their 787 and A350 orders for efficiency and fleet commonality with their other aircraft.
As an engineer who works both on the A350 and 787. Trust me, the A350 is in another league: system integration, reliability and passenger comfort. It is very good out of box whereas Boeing are still applying sticking plasters to their highly strung Screamliner.
What a load of bs 💩… I service both A350 and 787 planes for a contract airline that my airline does tech ops for other airlines. The a350 has far more problems and issues than 787’s.
@@peanuts2105 the 787 is a much more reliable aircraft than the A350. It’s also easier to service too. I don’t work for a dodgy airline since we’re one of the biggest 787’s operators in the world.
KLM used to be a Douglas Commercial airline. It flew every DC-model from the DC-2 onward including the rare DC-5, the DC-1 being a one-off and never marketed
@@AndreSomers ..and the Connie .... they weren't exclusively Douglas, but it's the only airline in the world that flew them all except the DC-1 which was a single aircraft built to order for TWA.
@@roykliffen9674 Late fifties early sixties, KLM`s fleet was a mess. Connies, DC 2-3-4-6-7C, Convairs , Electras, Viscounts and every Douglas product available after the DC8 I liked KLM up to the point that they updated their MD-11 cabins, read WAY less room. Their 777 with 10 seats abreast is torture. I wish them well.
Great video! However, considering one your old videos with the A350 not being a direct competitor to the 787, wouldn't Air France KLM choosing A350 be a response to the 777x delays?
This order on KLM’s part is mostly needed for replacing A330’s. I don’t think 777X was ever an option. KLM’s B777-300’s aren’t due for replacement yet, but it’ll be interesting to see what will happen when they are.
@@kevonvideoI think you need to see past the video (and Coby is missing a very important point). 1- the a350 competes with the 777...if they were looking to simply replace their a330, why not go for the a330neo or 787 (both cheaper, and KLM actually has a lot more B787 than a330). The a350 increases fleet range & capacity.. 2- They have already B788-10 in service, not expanding the number of orders gives a very clear indication to market - "KLM prefers the risk of new aircraft type, over expanding a type they are familiar with" 3- They elected to refurbish their B777 and introduce the a350 (competitor to the B777), instead of new B777 orders ....this signals, to me, that in its current trajectory the KLM fleet is moving to all Boeing...
As a customer and in view of Boeings past and present, to say it mildly, “quality” issues regarding the 787s and 737s, I feel much much more confident on an airplane built by Airbus thus booking my fights accordingly. The only Boeings I put my foot in are 757 and 767 which, tellingly, are not been built anymore.
You're literally 100 000 times more like to end up in a fatal car accident en route to the airport than on an airplane. Doesn't really matter which airline. Boeing is worse for safety but I still think it's safe
Well, 777 (non-x) and 787 is as common as A330(including neo) and A350, the only outlawer current in production is 737 anyway, while A220 is nothing really in common too.
@@umi3017although this is true, my understanding is that the systems differences between them are still bigger and more complex to address than the differences between all airbus models...
You missed a point, KLM has opted to replace the 737 NG withe A320/21 Neo which means they have reduced pilot training costs with a A320 / A350 combo compared with a A320 / 787 combo.
There is no reduction in pilot training costs between an A320 and A350. They’re not a common type rating and both require full courses. Just as the 737/787 combo would. The only aircraft types that have combines training platforms are the B757/767 and A330/340
I think you missed a key point, Ben Smith really wants to increase the communality and integration between AF and KLM and their subsidiaries. They had decided for a long time that the 350 would be the future workhorse of the AF long haul fleet so having so having some 350s for KLM would allow great economies of scale just like their recent KLM-TV narrow body order.
As I recall, until Ben Smith came in, KLM was ordering the A350. He moved the order to the AF fleet. Instead, they got the 787. Most of their order got delayed due to the Boeing quality control issues. So it makes sense for them to go with Airbus.
yep you're right. Thing also is that when KLM received the 787's a few years back is that there were a lot of quality issue's they discovered like loose seats, KLM had to fix it themselves
The options for 40 could be a good idea. I know the deal was probably made before the SAS share purchase but it now would be better since both AF and SK are airbus operators. And as you said, slot restrictions in AMS and CDG would probably force them to expand out of CPH instead. I think there is a probably a policy of two types of Long Haul aircraft. A350 would probably cover the lower end and the 777-9 would end up covering the trunk long haul routes.
I recently flew on a Virgin Atlantic 787 to the United States from London - and then back on a A350. A350 quieter and more comfortable IMO. Maybe passenger comfort was a reason too?
Don't forget to mention KLM is never buying new models. The model needs to be operational flying for at least 5 years before KLM will purchase it for their fleet. Just to avoid flight days because of needed improvements as the model matures. That could be one reason for not choosing the 737 max and also reduces the chance for the 777-9 in the future.
I for one am quite happy with this order. In the 787 and 777 I find economy too cramped, especially too narrow seats. In A350 it’s still acceptable. Assuming KLM takes the standard 3-3-3 configuration.
There is a reason to why KLM went A350s it has to do with ageing A330-203s from the early to mid 200s and down the road their late 2000s early 2010s A330-303s for replacement. Furthermore it allows their A330 pilots to fly A350s since they share the same pilot certification under EASA rules
@@XD-ql2kr then you should go explain the French civil aviation they made a mistake by validating both on my licence... A google search "EASA type rating and licence endorsement list" will prove you wrong. Why not check an information before you certify it?
Just been twice to Asia this year and only came back this week from Japan. I took Cathay Pacific via Hong Kong 🇭🇰 and flew eith their A350-1000 for the first time and I must say it is so more spacious than the 777. 777 seems to be so outdated by know. I really consider the aircraft typ now flying. Only 350 and 787 for mw now. And a220
Hye Coby. Love the channel. You say that it's unusual to pivot from one airline manufacturer to another, however if you look globally over time, this isn't really so unusual. Qantas has pivoted to Airbus. Virgin Australia went through a decade period where they relied on Airbus widebody domestic despite a Boeing widebody long haul, Cathay selecting the A350-900/1000 despite being a long-term Boeing customer, Emirates splitting their fleet Boeing/Airbus. Keep up the great work! Chris.
With Qantas, they are still clinging on to Boeing somewhat. They just took delivery of the last 787 from their first order for the type. Alongside they have the A350s ordered for Project Sunrise, Qantas also ordered more 787s and they are also using it to replace A330-300s instead of going for the A330neo. This is despite the fact that they ordered more of the A350 beyond the ones set to be delivered in the middle of this decade. This balances Qantas’s international flight networks in that once the A380 and A330ceo are retired, international flights are gonna be handled by both A350s and 787s. And I didn’t even mention Qantas subsidiary Jetstar, who happen to also use 787s for some of their international flights.
@@CoSmicTheRacingGamer Did you consider QANTAS' last order, when they split it into 787s and A350s. There was also a statement from QANTAS, that the intentions is to replace the A380 fleet with a fleet of A350-1000.
Also KLM (airf france group) is in a big fight with boeing due to the Delay and quality issues on the B787. They are seeking compensation and were expecting discounts on the 737Max family but boeing refused both. Not very suprised they are now siding Airbus.
You're forgetting some key reasons KLM is not going for the 787 compared to the A350. The 787-10 is much smaller than the A350-1000 when it comes to payload. KLM needs to replace their ancient triple -200 fleet pretty soon and the triple X isn't going to be certified anytime soon. KLM doesn't like to gamble on a plane of which it's not even sure when it will be certified and what specs it will have. When it comes to specs the 787 is also a major disappointment not meeting its specs compared to Airbus exceeding its specs. This uncertainty is also the reason KLM went for the A321 Neo and not the MAX10. Honestly I believe Airbus has a much better line up of aircraft at the moment and KLM makes a smart decision switching to Airbus.
Could've easily named the video "what makes THAT plane special over the 787", but you chose to keep the title informative and true to content. Thank You!
I was talking to an American Airlines 777 pilot over the summer who told me American is struggling with its cargo capacity on its 787s, which even the -9 can fit a similar amount of LD3 containers as a 767, not the 777-200ER. Because of so much volume in demand, American can't just replace their 787s with 777s as what will they do with the extra cargo. There's also a similar issue with their a321 NEOs replacing their 757s. Since KLM always has always had a large amount of cargo to fly (look at all the Combi 747s they flew), I'm not surprised they went with a jet that can fit the same if not higher number of LD3 containers in the cargo hold as their 777-200ERs while matching their range unlike the 787-10
The 767 does not use the LD3 container, it’s to large, it uses the smaller LD2 container. The A350-900 and the 787-9 can hold 36 LD3 containers, the 777-200 on the other hand can only hold 32 LD3 containers. Both the A350-900 and 787-9 has a larger cargo volume than the 777-200ER,even the old A330-300 has a slightly larger cargo volume
Airlines are usually very loyal to their preferred airliner manufacturer but I think in recent times Boeing has spurned the trust of many of its top customers. KLM, Qantas and Air Canada being among those.
In a previous video, you said the A350 is not a B787 competitor, rather the former competes with the B777. If AF-KLM was looking for a new large jet, maybe it would have been the 777X which is continuously delayed. Being frustrated with delays may result in opting for the A350
Uh, no. A350's will be replacing those 777's. Air France bought KLM. This was not a merger as stated. Air France is WAAAAAAAAYYY larger. a350 is a direct 777 replacement.
Reason why KLM flew the 747 for so long was also because they had asked Boeing to build a special variant for them; the 747 combi. Would not be surprised if they would do the same trick again with the 777-9.
Hell no they won't. Back in 747 combi days there were no long range freighters running around and why it made sense. Today that is not true in the slightest. Not to mention your average long range aircraft is carrying cargo already in their bellies. 747's equivalent aircraft used to be rare, they are not anymore. @@TravelFilming
I love KLM and Airbus (for sure the A350) so I am even happier Also, when KLM received it's 787's a few years ago there were a lot of quality issue's that they discovered like loose seats which KLM themselves had to fix
It makes more sense for KLM to stay with the Airbus family for common pilot training. The Airbus flight decks are designed for ease of cross crew training. Moving from the A320 to the A350 takes fewer sim sessions due to the similarities in flight decks.
Airbus A 350 also offers compatibility with their new A 320 series as they transition from the B 737. Air France their partner do not fly the B737 so some shared benefits too.
Boeing - delays in production (777-X). Plenty of issues with the 787 (from the time it first flew, until now). Plenty of issues with other aircraft as well (737-MAX). Shorter range. US company (KLM is European, so it would make sense to me that at some point in time, they would be "pushed" to favour Aibus in some of their deals. The last one may not have been a major decision factor, but I would not be surprised if it did have something to do with the decision. Plus, many resons mentioned in other comments below, like ease of switching to the A350 from other Airbus types. Or maybe using common maintainance facilities with Air France. Frankly, I would have been surprised if KLM went for the 787. Going for the A350 looks like the obvious solution for them.
Some years ago now, Delta opted for the 350 over the 787, and again the main reason was availability. Boeing has STILL not fixed the management problems they inherited from McDonnell-Douglas. They wanted to suck more at the military-industrial teat and so lost their emphasis on engineering and efficiency. I doubt they will ever reclaim those lost virtues. Business schools are poisoning business.
KLM have 31 777's, 23 787's and 5 more on order. Air France have 61 777's and 10 787's. These planes are not going away anytime soon. Air France-KLM decided to order the 50 A350's because they are cheaper to buy (for AF/KLM), cheaper to operate and will be delivered onetime.
Because the A350 is the much better plane, the A350 has a modern sidestick touchscreen cockpit, is has the quieter cabin and a wider cabin, the 787 is too narrow for first class cabins.
Hi Cody, Great video and thanks for the clear explanation why they chose Airbus. I did found it very interesting. I was completely surprised that I came across you on You Tube. A month or two ago we met next to the runway at Schiphol. 😊
No major airline can afford to take the risk that their complete fleet is grounded by FAA and/or EASA. In the long run, all big carriers need to have both platforms, no matter what.
The A350 was the last airplane i flew in my 43 years carreer. Once you get it ready to start the engines (the preflight preparations are a nightmare😂) it is a wonderful machine.
My recent flight with 787-10 made me thinking strongly I will never fly again this plane when I have the choice between it and 350-100. It is like the day and the night, do not waiste your time : no comparison is possible. The 350 is like the 380 before a real changing experience in flying. Not at all the 787 noisy and uncomfortable. My advice is of course a simple passenger advice... but not only marketing and prices and finance are making the comnpanies choosing their planes.... customers are. You will never force me to fly a plane I do not wont to fly with, and when it happens with a sufficient number of passengers, companies start understanding...
Uhm, while this may not be entirely fair and balanced, I'd say given the latest "development" at Boeing it seems KLM either made a wise choice or dodged the bullet. It's not just the 737MAX which is showing some "symptoms"...
I think its too much of a common mistake to always compare the 787 and the a350. No one would ever think about comparing the a330 and the 777 well its the same thing here. The a330 Neo is the direct rival of the 787 family and the a350 family is the direct rival of the 777 family. the only difference is that some variants of the 787 and a350 gets in the same area especially on the range and pax capacity and that could be the only reason, theres no other reason for airlines to not have both a350's and 787's if they were running a330's and 777's in the past.
@4:45 Any present day widebody can comfortably reach South of Africa with ease.(even with Airspace restrictions of North Africa and Niger in place) The A330-200/-300 B787-8/-9/-10 A350-900/-1000 B777-200ER/-200LR/-300ER A330-800/-900
If not for Schiphol airport’s gate size handicaps and Airbus canning their a380 program…I bet the King of the Skies will be a good option for more passenger capacity. A380 revival is plausible.
Am I the only one here who thinks the title is kind of misleading? KLM currently has 23 787s in its fleet, with both -9s and -10s in operation. The title makes you think they have none and decided to go for the A350 instead.
May sound like a long stretch; the Dutch are about to choose a replacement submarine type for they aging fleet. In the running are three offers: French, German and Swedish / NL. Choosing Airbus might also be a political move to please the French. As the likely choice for the submarine will be Swedish / NL or German.
@@tiesmuysNothing, just like they had nothing to do with pilot and cabin crew salaries. And still they made it a precondition for lending money to KLM during covid times. A kind of blackmail by government. I don’t say it is true and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was. The Dutch government is a significant shareholder of the AF-KLM holding, which the French don’t like. Because it is a threat to French industrial policy. The takeover of KLM by AF and the French government was done to be the leader and the only leader in the new holding. Having another major shareholder wasn’t in the plans of the French. A bit of bad blood here, which the Dutch have to massage away, because the French bare a grudge for eternity. So not such a strange thought.
Well first major purchase since merger where 1/3 of stock is OWNED by the French government... Gee I wonder who they would pick even if the a350 sucked(it doesn't)...
I think one missed point is that Air France-KLM leadership have recently discovered the efficiencies offered by greater synergy between brands. The more of one type they order, the bigger the discount they can receive. Additionally, this enables them to use the same interiors, providing even more savings. Furthermore, it makes it very easy if, down they line, they want to move some planes between the airlines. There is a reason that many budget carriers operate only one aircraft family type. (Usually either 737 or 320) It is extremely efficient.
KLM has always been a loyal customer of Boeing and before that Douglas. But the last 10 years Boeing struggles with .... everything. To name a few: Safety (737Max), Production Quality (especially Charleston), Production Volumes and no smooth FAA approval of new types. To top it off: Boeing management announcing that they won't innovate for the next 10 years. Which of those issues can also be linked with Airbus? When the A350 competitor 777X will fly commercially is still unknown. Must have been a real tough decision for Air France-KLM.
Boeing lost the plot after building the wonderful 757/767 pair and also the 777 - particularly the dash 200F and 300ER. But since then it’s been something of a disaster. As you say it’s quite difficult for an airline to change types but if they can’t get the product they need from the incumbent manufacturer they will. Currently Boeing seems totally unable to produce aeroplanes reliably without intermittent production shutdowns or at least slow downs. I started my civilian career on the B757-200 which was (is) a wonderful jet. I was dragged scream and yelling to the A320 which at that time wasn’t wonderful. But I soon realised that the Airbus products, particularly the 330, were far superior to the Boeing products. I finished my career on the B777 and came to see that, while a very capable aeroplane, it was very antiquated in many, many ways. Very sad turn of events for a famous old company.
All the 3 reasons you presented to explain why KLM took A350 instead B787 are really silly : 1. Range: the air space restrictions against Russia won t last forever, 2 : Price depends on the volume negotiation with Boeing and Airbus, not if one has lower peice list than another, 3 : Delivery time doesn t mean the final criteria for choosing Airbus or Boeing, it depends more what you already have in your fleet
The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has now lasted 9 years, even if sanctions were only put in place last year. Apart from something radical happening in Russian politics the war does not look like it'd end anytime soon. And Russian leaders are wanted for crimes against humanity. If I was an airline, I would not count on the sanctions dropping during lifetime of an airframe.
In answer to the question at 11:08 - yes, they did. For all the better economics, performance, and other factors in its favor, the A350 is also a very beautiful machine. Those wingtips are part of its elegance.
Hey Cody! Thanks for a great video as usual. In terms of this video, do you think the 789 is too small? That should easily cover the distance between Amsterdam and South America, South Africa?
Not only size is small but also payload. I remember some routes are 1-stop routes, that means the aircraft has to carry passengers and cargo from 2 destinations. A bit too much for 787s.
Flown with KLM since I've been a small child always Boeing. Their beautiful Boeing 747 was always a pleasure. But I've flown Airbus and they're planes are great as wel. A-380 is very impressive. I can imagine that having one type of plane across the two companies makes life a lot easier for everyone.
The B777X does not have the range, burn more fuel and cost more than the 350 because it’s not a new plane, new engines and wing mainly…Boeing loves doing new with old but this time they lost.
Latest update - Air France KLM are buying into SAS, it's thought largely to use Copenhagen as a new hub and take pressure off Amsterdam. That counts against the 777-9 argument that KLM would need more capacity at Amsterdam.
If I had placed the order knowing they would also be replacing the A330's, I would have ordered the -8 for replacing the -200's as both already operate the 787-9. While the A350-900's can easily replace their 777-200ER's, they would be getting some replacements too large for them. I think an eventual KLM order for the -9X would also be iffy, as EASA does allow for concurrent type ratings for the A320 through 380.
You’ll probably find they didn’t go for the 77X-8 due to big delays in the program plus the amount of extra training needed for the existing A330 pilots. Plus going down this route gives them time to evaluate how the A350s fit in with their routes and gives them chance to decide that when the time comes to replace the 777-200s and 300s do they go for the 777x or get more A350s Fleet commonality can be good for like all the reasons Cory says but if something like the 737max groundings happens again, last thing you want is for your whole fleet to be grounded.
Air France-KLM did the right decision. With the on going manufacturing flaws on Boeing planes, we cannot sure how many new 787s delivered are poorly made, might affecting the safety of the general public.
One thing to note about KLM is that their 747 fleet was largely combi 747’s meaning that the airplanes were rarely filled to the max with passengers, but rather some of the passenger capacity of the 747 was used for extra cargo. KLM has always had a large cargo division. So I don’t think KLM has a problem finding a large enough aircraft in the current Boeing/Airbus lineup to meet the passenger only demand seat-wise. I’m sure if the 777 is offered in a combi variation like the 747 was that it would make the 777 an extra interesting airplane for a cargo-heavy airline like KLM
If delivery times were a concern for KLM I doubt the 777x makes sense. That plane have been delayed so often that it's the poster child of uncertain delivery times major customers like emirates have already complained about the endless delays.
One thong you mentioned in this video is very inaccurate and kinda misleading: AF is an airbus airline when you look at AF as whole company, but once we talk about long haul fleet AF is and always has been the Boeing airline. Majority of wide bodies are Boeing made.
4:40 - You could have phrased this stronger. “As KLM has to be able to reach the countries part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in South America” because that’s why KLM will always need long rangers. They **need** to service the Islands.
No Surprise that Air France had a lot of Airbus aircraft given their main assembly line is in Toulouse. I would suspect that Price was the primary motivating factor, with everything else being secondary deal sweeteners. By combining orders, the group would be in a stronger position to get a better deal then buying individually
no 4 could be that boeing is a hot mess right now and their planes have had so much issues that maybe coupled with 1,2,3 it was time for klm air france to reign in differences
A clear advantage of the a350 is that it is possible to install a 3-4-3 config, I dont think they will opt for a 3-4-3 config at the moment, but it always good to have the option if it becomes mainstream.
Go to our sponsor betterhelp.com/explanes for 10% off your first month of therapy with BetterHelp and get matched with a therapist who will listen and help.
The A350 is saddled with an engine that has a premature life on the wing.
For the Trent XWB engine on the 350, the time between overhauls is premature.
HPT; ( High Pressure Turbine ) blades and IPC; (Intermediate Compressor ) blades do not last as long as designed. Some only last 2,000 - 3,000 cycles with an on-wing time of only three years in many instances.
For the current line-up of Trent 900, 1000 & XWB; these engines struggle to go 4 years before they need to be removed for overhaul. The EP3 build standard for the Trent 900 which RR refuses to improve needs an overhaul every 4 to 5 years, or about 3,500 cycles which is premature for an engine which has been in service since 2008. Abnormal wear to engine blades in the IPC of engines. Rolls-Royce previously had to take action after abnormal wear was spotted in its Trent 1000 family. This saw many aircraft grounded, pending engine checks, and maintenance.
Rolls Royce is treading lightly after a previous issue affecting its Trent 1000 engine cost airlines billions of dollars. Three variants of this engine have been affected by corrosion issues.
On another note,
Al Nippon and Air New Zealand have dropped RR engines to power their future 787 orders in favor of the superior GEnx engines which are outselling RR by a margin of almost three to one.
More airlines are likely to follow this trend.
bless, another salty Boeing and GE fan, no other reason for your comment@@John-nc4bl
betterhelp have a terrible track record
Betterhelp have done terrible things to the private data and sold it all to advertisers. Do you really thrust these guys?
@@Hi-hw8tl still surprised some youtubers still work with them
So, basically Airbus make a plane that's cheaper to run, with a longer range, that's less likely to fall out of the sky, with a lower sticker price, and can deliver it sooner.
The only right answer! All the political BS is hilarious. Airlines don’t care about politics.
@@VeniVidiAjax Airlines do.. literally the biggest shareholders of Air France-KLM are the French and Dutch governments.
@@SQERDOMOONLIGHTyet they have been buying Boeing until now. Airbus didn’t just pop out of thin air.
Thanks for the answer mate, you just saved 12 minutes of my life :)
@@ertugciftci so you bought the Airbus? Excellent choice
it has to be mentioned too, that KLM are planning on retiring their rather small A330 fleet, so these pilots will have a shorter and easier conversion. plus it proves KLM has been flying Airbus before.. also they ordered a lot of Airbus narrowbodies and are going to use maintenance facilities of AirFrance. lastly, it is not a total turnaround as they are already flying 787s.
Yea
However, if they are killing the a330 fleet you could expect them to do the same to the 787 as these are direct competitors (and the 787 / a350 are not)
@@jpazinho their 787 are too new to retire
He mentioned that.
@@davidesquer1312and yet, airlines plan their fleets on a spectrum of 10/15 years (minimum)...no orders of 787 signal KLM is moving on a different direction and way from both the a330 (which they are replacing) and the 787 in the future...obviously the 787s wont be retired anytime soon...but I wouldn't be surprised if in 10 years time there was no increase in the number of 787 on service at KLM
As a customer who only flies economy, the A350 and A380 are my favorite planes for comfort, quietness and facilities. 787 close behind.
Totally agree. In B787 and B777 (in 3-4-3) I’m always contemplating to upgrade to premium economy because of the narrow seats. No need for that on the A350.
Agree A350 is one of the most comfortable rides in aviation. It is a favorite with travelers.
I really like the 2-4-2 config on the a330, personaly i prefer the a330NEO to the a350. But of course, the a340-600 will always be my favorite! :)
@@Jonathan-ki4izFlew it from Paris-Antananarivo (9h) except the food,(u got work Airfrance) it was awesome
the A380 is the only aircraft I found which is OK in economy. the 787 in 9 abreast and 777 in 10 abreast is miserable with the right shoulder room. I'm trying the a350 next month but I can't see it being much better
This isn't the first KLM and Airbus shocker. They decided to switch to the A320 family for their B737 replacements not too long ago too
A320 is now better. The MAX has been a bad idea. Sigh. The 737 was very good. Was.
@@bernardmueller5676 True. Somewhere in the stone age.
Also considering their already permanent top of the chart incident in history, It probably was wise to let the 737max stay right where it is😅😅😅 @@bernardmueller5676
The Neo series are really a no brainer comparing to the Max, it did'nt surprise me at all.
Elbers also would have bought the A 321-NEO over the Max.
But low cost Transavia switches from B737 to A321...
Having flown on the 787 with BA and on the A350 with Cathay Pacific there is no doubt the A350 is a superior aircraft and extremely quiet on a long haul flight
The 787 isn't even in the same class as the A350. The 777 is the competitor to the A350.
Passenger experience is a very low priority when airlines buy new jets.
@@MacrossJetYes it is in the same class. The variants of the A350 cross over with both the 787 and the 777.
Boeing got screwed even more with 777x ain't coming out till 2025-2026
What has the class it is in got to to with what plane he prefers to fly on, a triggered and irrelevant answer to his comment@@MacrossJet
KLM did the right thing IMO for all of the reasons you went through. The Boeing of today is a company one can't count on for engineering or manufacturing quality. Once upon a time Boeing led the world in designing and making complex aircraft. But, the money first guys took over and destroyed the engineering integrity of the company. Airbus isn't perfect, but they are more trustworthy than Boeing.
Got some extra validation of this, recently.
Agree totally! Even Boeing employees DON'T want to fly on their own planes!
100%. Airbus might have their flaws but they're waaaay more trustworthy than that corrupt amalgamation of a creature whatever you call current day 'boeing'. They should have never merged with Mcdouglas
@@TheOzthewiz Have you considered those employees are idiots?
@@natowaveenjoyer9862 if the employees are idiots, that's just an even BIGGER reason not to fly boeing LMAO
I worked on Airbus aircraft since the introduction of the A300 and I was always impressed with their quality and innovative design. Boeing simply lack their former dedication to superb quality and they have sacrificed this in order to satisfy shareholders. The 787 is testimony to that.
The 737 MAX is testimony to that …
Sad to know all this, the planes are amazing, but thee struggle mess the things up.
to be fair the 787 was actually innovative.
The 787 changed the entire airplane industry forever, you must remember they started the 787 project all the way back in 2003 when even the A380 hadn't taken off. So if we compare the success of the 787 in terms of being able to guess where the flight industry was going, Boeing got it completely right back then as the A380s are almost retired at only 20 years after release. It was an incredibly innovative airline - the first with albatross style wings, the first with the new era of engines and so many other things that no other planes were doing at the time. just because it gets out done by the a350 today, which is a much newer plane, doesn't mean it wasn't innovative back then
Airbus is simply just the superior commercial aircraft manufacturer at the moment.
Definitely, boeing has run themselves to the ground
For coach passenger comfort, absolutely. With respect to economics, I don’t know.
When I travel, I tend to gravitate to Airbus …
American product is getting bad like Chinese product. I will feel safe now knowing that Airbus is a lot safer plane than a Boeing and Comac
Amsterdam - Jakarta is a very big route for KLM, and i think the A350 can do that route without stopping while it's pushing it for the 787, so that is also a huge factor.
is it because a overwhelmingly high number of backpackers? :)
@@chengyoujiang6076 Or the Dutch used to have a monopoly at the Spice Islands for I believe it was nutmeg, and fought the British over this lucrative spice? ;)
Big route? But where is Garuda?😅
@@alphonsusjimos9758 Garuda codeshares on KLM flights to Indonesia.
Very interesting video Coby. Don’t forget to look up and God bless the Dutch.
I believe that the additional width of the airbus also played a role. Every review highlights the added comfort of the a350.
Makes even more sense to go Airbus now when Airfrance-KLM took a major stake in SAS, which is also an Airbus airline.
Even more sense because the country of France is part owner of both Airbus AND KLM? ;) FOLLOW THE MONEY
@@protonneutron9046that argument just don't hold up. Just look at Air France's fleet with the 777 being an important part
irA minority part. Look at years BEFORE France owned part of Airbus to today. The fleet composition did a flip. The evidence is there. @@ViktorFromDK
@@protonneutron9046 But you can't explain why Air France has been so reluctant to 35K, and had a significant size of 787 order before the group CEO Ben Smith swapped them with A350s.
Meanwhile KLM managements had ordered A350 once way back in 2013, and also insisted in A350 this time according to some rumors. Ben Smith on the other hand actually favoured more 787s to KLM.
"before the group CEO Ben Smith swapped them with A350" There ya go.@@steinwaldmadchen
Interestingly, KLM had a smaller A350 order in the past but back then AF and KLM switched their 787 and A350 orders for efficiency and fleet commonality with their other aircraft.
KLM got 2 brand new 777-300 of AF.. for that switch
As an engineer who works both on the A350 and 787. Trust me, the A350 is in another league: system integration, reliability and passenger comfort. It is very good out of box whereas Boeing are still applying sticking plasters to their highly strung Screamliner.
Fast approaching 1900 orders for the "Screamliner", evidently, airlines didn't get your memo.!!!
What a load of bs 💩… I service both A350 and 787 planes for a contract airline that my airline does tech ops for other airlines. The a350 has far more problems and issues than 787’s.
@is500fsport5 you must work for dodgy airline. My airline have both and 787 is by far the most reliable and technically advanced
@@peanuts2105 the 787 is a much more reliable aircraft than the A350. It’s also easier to service too. I don’t work for a dodgy airline since we’re one of the biggest 787’s operators in the world.
KLM used to be a Douglas Commercial airline. It flew every DC-model from the DC-2 onward including the rare DC-5, the DC-1 being a one-off and never marketed
They also flew Fokker, of course.
@@AndreSomers ..and the Connie .... they weren't exclusively Douglas, but it's the only airline in the world that flew them all except the DC-1 which was a single aircraft built to order for TWA.
@@roykliffen9674 Late fifties early sixties, KLM`s fleet was a mess. Connies, DC 2-3-4-6-7C, Convairs , Electras, Viscounts and every Douglas product available after the DC8 I liked KLM up to the point that they updated their MD-11 cabins, read WAY less room. Their 777 with 10 seats abreast is torture. I wish them well.
There was only one DC-1 and it flew for TWA
Yes - in the mid-1980s the KLM (jumbo -sized) fleet postcard showed all MD except for the 747.
Great video! However, considering one your old videos with the A350 not being a direct competitor to the 787, wouldn't Air France KLM choosing A350 be a response to the 777x delays?
This. Facts.
This order on KLM’s part is mostly needed for replacing A330’s. I don’t think 777X was ever an option. KLM’s B777-300’s aren’t due for replacement yet, but it’ll be interesting to see what will happen when they are.
@@kevonvideoI think you need to see past the video (and Coby is missing a very important point).
1- the a350 competes with the 777...if they were looking to simply replace their a330, why not go for the a330neo or 787 (both cheaper, and KLM actually has a lot more B787 than a330). The a350 increases fleet range & capacity..
2- They have already B788-10 in service, not expanding the number of orders gives a very clear indication to market - "KLM prefers the risk of new aircraft type, over expanding a type they are familiar with"
3- They elected to refurbish their B777 and introduce the a350 (competitor to the B777), instead of new B777 orders ....this signals, to me, that in its current trajectory the KLM fleet is moving to all Boeing...
facts, it is
@@jpazinhothe A350 wil also be replacing the 777-200 at KLM
As a customer and in view of Boeings past and present, to say it mildly, “quality” issues regarding the 787s and 737s, I feel much much more confident on an airplane built by Airbus thus booking my fights accordingly. The only Boeings I put my foot in are 757 and 767 which, tellingly, are not been built anymore.
Panboi😂😂😂
What a joke
Good shit, can't blame you man.
You're literally 100 000 times more like to end up in a fatal car accident en route to the airport than on an airplane. Doesn't really matter which airline. Boeing is worse for safety but I still think it's safe
A major advantage is that the Airbus cockpit configuration / layout is very similar for the whole Airbus family of aircraft.
Yea the Boeing internal architecture is illogical😂 and never the same
Well, 777 (non-x) and 787 is as common as A330(including neo) and A350, the only outlawer current in production is 737 anyway, while A220 is nothing really in common too.
@@umi3017although this is true, my understanding is that the systems differences between them are still bigger and more complex to address than the differences between all airbus models...
This commonality makes perfect sense, economically. Distance is a plus now that have to avoid Russia.
@umi3017 but 757/767 are different to the 787 and 737. Having FBW is a massive help in Airbus compared to the older Boeing lineup
You missed a point, KLM has opted to replace the 737 NG withe A320/21 Neo which means they have reduced pilot training costs with a A320 / A350 combo compared with a A320 / 787 combo.
There is no reduction in pilot training costs between an A320 and A350. They’re not a common type rating and both require full courses. Just as the 737/787 combo would. The only aircraft types that have combines training platforms are the B757/767 and A330/340
I think you missed a key point, Ben Smith really wants to increase the communality and integration between AF and KLM and their subsidiaries.
They had decided for a long time that the 350 would be the future workhorse of the AF long haul fleet so having so having some 350s for KLM would allow great economies of scale just like their recent KLM-TV narrow body order.
and will contribute to the passenger comfort and better service on board
good point
I am no expert, but that could also mean sharing maintenance services.
I just flew on four A350's recently and I have to say, it's a really nice plane. Takes off like a rocket too.
As I recall, until Ben Smith came in, KLM was ordering the A350. He moved the order to the AF fleet. Instead, they got the 787. Most of their order got delayed due to the Boeing quality control issues. So it makes sense for them to go with Airbus.
yep you're right. Thing also is that when KLM received the 787's a few years back is that there were a lot of quality issue's they discovered like loose seats, KLM had to fix it themselves
The options for 40 could be a good idea. I know the deal was probably made before the SAS share purchase but it now would be better since both AF and SK are airbus operators. And as you said, slot restrictions in AMS and CDG would probably force them to expand out of CPH instead. I think there is a probably a policy of two types of Long Haul aircraft. A350 would probably cover the lower end and the 777-9 would end up covering the trunk long haul routes.
The stories of manufacturing issues of the 787 in North Carolina are scary enough to want to use airbus.
I recently flew on a Virgin Atlantic 787 to the United States from London - and then back on a A350. A350 quieter and more comfortable IMO. Maybe passenger comfort was a reason too?
The A350 order is also to replace the B772 not only the A332 and A333. The B773 is way to young for replacement.
Don't forget to mention KLM is never buying new models.
The model needs to be operational flying for at least 5 years before KLM will purchase it for their fleet.
Just to avoid flight days because of needed improvements as the model matures.
That could be one reason for not choosing the 737 max and also reduces the chance for the 777-9 in the future.
I for one am quite happy with this order. In the 787 and 777 I find economy too cramped, especially too narrow seats. In A350 it’s still acceptable. Assuming KLM takes the standard 3-3-3 configuration.
I have a feeling they will go 3-4-3.
@@widget787 I will cry and leave Flying Blue if they will 😭😭
@@widget787 it was already a shame they did this on the triple 7, no way they'll dare to do this on the A350
@@Megalodon1986 they were already one of the poineers to go 10 abreast in the 777.
There is a reason to why KLM went A350s it has to do with ageing A330-203s from the early to mid 200s and down the road their late 2000s early 2010s A330-303s for replacement. Furthermore it allows their A330 pilots to fly A350s since they share the same pilot certification under EASA rules
Its not the same, different type raiting is required. But getting A350 TR from A330 TR takes 2 weeks or less
@@XD-ql2krbut a lot simpler than the whole Boeing fleet
@@XD-ql2kr330/350 is the same type rating, exactly like 787/777, there is just a difference course to fly both of them.
Nope, 330 and 340 have same TR, 350 is different
@@XD-ql2kr then you should go explain the French civil aviation they made a mistake by validating both on my licence...
A google search "EASA type rating and licence endorsement list" will prove you wrong. Why not check an information before you certify it?
Thanks!
Just been twice to Asia this year and only came back this week from Japan. I took Cathay Pacific via Hong Kong 🇭🇰 and flew eith their A350-1000 for the first time and I must say it is so more spacious than the 777. 777 seems to be so outdated by know. I really consider the aircraft typ now flying. Only 350 and 787 for mw now. And a220
When KLM wanted to fly the Fokker 100, Boeing played very dirty games.
Like losing landing rights in America.
KLM has certainly not forgotten that.
just like Boeing played games with Delta and Embraier. Fuck Boeing!
I'm glad they made that decision.
Hye Coby. Love the channel. You say that it's unusual to pivot from one airline manufacturer to another, however if you look globally over time, this isn't really so unusual. Qantas has pivoted to Airbus. Virgin Australia went through a decade period where they relied on Airbus widebody domestic despite a Boeing widebody long haul, Cathay selecting the A350-900/1000 despite being a long-term Boeing customer, Emirates splitting their fleet Boeing/Airbus. Keep up the great work! Chris.
With Qantas, they are still clinging on to Boeing somewhat. They just took delivery of the last 787 from their first order for the type.
Alongside they have the A350s ordered for Project Sunrise, Qantas also ordered more 787s and they are also using it to replace A330-300s instead of going for the A330neo. This is despite the fact that they ordered more of the A350 beyond the ones set to be delivered in the middle of this decade. This balances Qantas’s international flight networks in that once the A380 and A330ceo are retired, international flights are gonna be handled by both A350s and 787s.
And I didn’t even mention Qantas subsidiary Jetstar, who happen to also use 787s for some of their international flights.
@@CoSmicTheRacingGamer Did you consider QANTAS' last order, when they split it into 787s and A350s. There was also a statement from QANTAS, that the intentions is to replace the A380 fleet with a fleet of A350-1000.
@@aquaden8344 I did mention the last order.
Also KLM (airf france group) is in a big fight with boeing due to the Delay and quality issues on the B787. They are seeking compensation and were expecting discounts on the 737Max family but boeing refused both. Not very suprised they are now siding Airbus.
“When one door closes, another door opens”
-Boeing
You're forgetting some key reasons KLM is not going for the 787 compared to the A350. The 787-10 is much smaller than the A350-1000 when it comes to payload. KLM needs to replace their ancient triple -200 fleet pretty soon and the triple X isn't going to be certified anytime soon. KLM doesn't like to gamble on a plane of which it's not even sure when it will be certified and what specs it will have. When it comes to specs the 787 is also a major disappointment not meeting its specs compared to Airbus exceeding its specs. This uncertainty is also the reason KLM went for the A321 Neo and not the MAX10. Honestly I believe Airbus has a much better line up of aircraft at the moment and KLM makes a smart decision switching to Airbus.
Could've easily named the video "what makes THAT plane special over the 787", but you chose to keep the title informative and true to content. Thank You!
I was talking to an American Airlines 777 pilot over the summer who told me American is struggling with its cargo capacity on its 787s, which even the -9 can fit a similar amount of LD3 containers as a 767, not the 777-200ER. Because of so much volume in demand, American can't just replace their 787s with 777s as what will they do with the extra cargo.
There's also a similar issue with their a321 NEOs replacing their 757s.
Since KLM always has always had a large amount of cargo to fly (look at all the Combi 747s they flew), I'm not surprised they went with a jet that can fit the same if not higher number of LD3 containers in the cargo hold as their 777-200ERs while matching their range unlike the 787-10
The 767 does not use the LD3 container, it’s to large, it uses the smaller LD2 container.
The A350-900 and the 787-9 can hold 36 LD3 containers, the 777-200 on the other hand can only hold 32 LD3 containers. Both the A350-900 and 787-9 has a larger cargo volume than the 777-200ER,even the old A330-300 has a slightly larger cargo volume
767 uses LD2s not LD3s
They have all the operating data for both types and I am sure that they have made the correct decisions with this order.
I love the excitement I get when I see a new uploaded video 😂
Airlines are usually very loyal to their preferred airliner manufacturer but I think in recent times Boeing has spurned the trust of many of its top customers.
KLM, Qantas and Air Canada being among those.
and Southwest with their shit Max
In a previous video, you said the A350 is not a B787 competitor, rather the former competes with the B777. If AF-KLM was looking for a new large jet, maybe it would have been the 777X which is continuously delayed. Being frustrated with delays may result in opting for the A350
This new order (now A350) is to replace the 777-200 and A330 fleet of the Air France-KLM group. Capacity wise, the 787-10 fits in for these two.
No, B777-9 is too big for both of them and B777-8's range are not useful for their lack of longer range routes.
I think that airfrance is more likely to buy the 777-9 because they operate a far larger fleet of 777s and their 777s are somewhat older than klms
nah Airfrance want to make stronger bonds with Airbus
Not when 772 and 77F are both replaced by A350s in the future, sorry.
Uh, no. A350's will be replacing those 777's. Air France bought KLM. This was not a merger as stated. Air France is WAAAAAAAAYYY larger. a350 is a direct 777 replacement.
Reason why KLM flew the 747 for so long was also because they had asked Boeing to build a special variant for them; the 747 combi. Would not be surprised if they would do the same trick again with the 777-9.
Hell no they won't. Back in 747 combi days there were no long range freighters running around and why it made sense. Today that is not true in the slightest. Not to mention your average long range aircraft is carrying cargo already in their bellies. 747's equivalent aircraft used to be rare, they are not anymore. @@TravelFilming
A350 is a better aircraft for passengers. I been in both 787 and A350. Most prefer A350.
I love KLM and Airbus (for sure the A350) so I am even happier
Also, when KLM received it's 787's a few years ago there were a lot of quality issue's that they discovered like loose seats which KLM themselves had to fix
It makes more sense for KLM to stay with the Airbus family for common pilot training. The Airbus flight decks are designed for ease of cross crew training. Moving from the A320 to the A350 takes fewer sim sessions due to the similarities in flight decks.
Airbus A 350 also offers compatibility with their new A 320 series as they transition from the B 737. Air France their partner do not fly the B737 so some shared benefits too.
Boeing - delays in production (777-X). Plenty of issues with the 787 (from the time it first flew, until now). Plenty of issues with other aircraft as well (737-MAX). Shorter range. US company (KLM is European, so it would make sense to me that at some point in time, they would be "pushed" to favour Aibus in some of their deals. The last one may not have been a major decision factor, but I would not be surprised if it did have something to do with the decision. Plus, many resons mentioned in other comments below, like ease of switching to the A350 from other Airbus types. Or maybe using common maintainance facilities with Air France. Frankly, I would have been surprised if KLM went for the 787. Going for the A350 looks like the obvious solution for them.
Maybe let's not forget that Airbus is located in and partially owned by France and the Netherlands. Why should they buy American?
While boeing are busy putting out fires, airbus are making each batch of aircraft more efficiently and reducing costs while increasing performance
Always look forward to your videos, Coby! Keep up the good work!
Some years ago now, Delta opted for the 350 over the 787, and again the main reason was availability. Boeing has STILL not fixed the management problems they inherited from McDonnell-Douglas. They wanted to suck more at the military-industrial teat and so lost their emphasis on engineering and efficiency. I doubt they will ever reclaim those lost virtues. Business schools are poisoning business.
Before KLM became a Boeing airline, it was very much a Douglas airline. DC-8, DC-9, DC-10, MD-11.
I love this A350s, I flew many times, it is the best plane there is!
KLM have 31 777's, 23 787's and 5 more on order. Air France have 61 777's and 10 787's. These planes are not going away anytime soon. Air France-KLM decided to order the 50 A350's because they are cheaper to buy (for AF/KLM), cheaper to operate and will be delivered onetime.
Because the A350 is the much better plane, the A350 has a modern sidestick touchscreen cockpit, is has the quieter cabin and a wider cabin, the 787 is too narrow for first class cabins.
Hi Cody, Great video and thanks for the clear explanation why they chose Airbus. I did found it very interesting. I was completely surprised that I came across you on You Tube. A month or two ago we met next to the runway at Schiphol. 😊
No major airline can afford to take the risk that their complete fleet is grounded by FAA and/or EASA. In the long run, all big carriers need to have both platforms, no matter what.
The A350 was the last airplane i flew in my 43 years carreer. Once you get it ready to start the engines (the preflight preparations are a nightmare😂) it is a wonderful machine.
Who knows when the 777x well actually enter service?
Airlines can't order it with any certainty, at least for now.
I absolutely see the 777X at both AF and KL. But not yet, maybe another five years to go.
My recent flight with 787-10 made me thinking strongly I will never fly again this plane when I have the choice between it and 350-100. It is like the day and the night, do not waiste your time : no comparison is possible. The 350 is like the 380 before a real changing experience in flying. Not at all the 787 noisy and uncomfortable.
My advice is of course a simple passenger advice... but not only marketing and prices and finance are making the comnpanies choosing their planes.... customers are. You will never force me to fly a plane I do not wont to fly with, and when it happens with a sufficient number of passengers, companies start understanding...
Hey dude !
I think that the more a350 we get in the air, the better. Also, I'm buying one of these a350 tees right away
Uhm, while this may not be entirely fair and balanced, I'd say given the latest "development" at Boeing it seems KLM either made a wise choice or dodged the bullet. It's not just the 737MAX which is showing some "symptoms"...
Thx Coby for this review. Also consider the current recession and therefore investments in Europe make sense for KLM/Air France
I think its too much of a common mistake to always compare the 787 and the a350. No one would ever think about comparing the a330 and the 777 well its the same thing here. The a330 Neo is the direct rival of the 787 family and the a350 family is the direct rival of the 777 family. the only difference is that some variants of the 787 and a350 gets in the same area especially on the range and pax capacity and that could be the only reason, theres no other reason for airlines to not have both a350's and 787's if they were running a330's and 777's in the past.
Smart dutchmen :)
@4:45
Any present day widebody can comfortably reach South of Africa with ease.(even with Airspace restrictions of North Africa and Niger in place)
The A330-200/-300
B787-8/-9/-10
A350-900/-1000
B777-200ER/-200LR/-300ER
A330-800/-900
If not for Schiphol airport’s gate size handicaps and Airbus canning their a380 program…I bet the King of the Skies will be a good option for more passenger capacity. A380 revival is plausible.
Am I the only one here who thinks the title is kind of misleading? KLM currently has 23 787s in its fleet, with both -9s and -10s in operation.
The title makes you think they have none and decided to go for the A350 instead.
May sound like a long stretch; the Dutch are about to choose a replacement submarine type for they aging fleet. In the running are three offers: French, German and Swedish / NL. Choosing Airbus might also be a political move to please the French. As the likely choice for the submarine will be Swedish / NL or German.
What has the Dutch government to do with the ordering of KLM and AF aircraft?
@@tiesmuysNothing, just like they had nothing to do with pilot and cabin crew salaries. And still they made it a precondition for lending money to KLM during covid times. A kind of blackmail by government. I don’t say it is true and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was. The Dutch government is a significant shareholder of the AF-KLM holding, which the French don’t like. Because it is a threat to French industrial policy. The takeover of KLM by AF and the French government was done to be the leader and the only leader in the new holding. Having another major shareholder wasn’t in the plans of the French. A bit of bad blood here, which the Dutch have to massage away, because the French bare a grudge for eternity. So not such a strange thought.
Seems KLM got the best deal. Congratulations on your UA-cam career.
First time in a while that KLM gets a airbus instead of a boeing
They’re also switching from B737 to A320. So lots of Airbus planes to come for KLM!
Air France Bought KLM...This was not a merger as stated. For pride reasons the KLM name was retained. Of course they went with Airbus.
Well first major purchase since merger where 1/3 of stock is OWNED by the French government... Gee I wonder who they would pick even if the a350 sucked(it doesn't)...
I think one missed point is that Air France-KLM leadership have recently discovered the efficiencies offered by greater synergy between brands. The more of one type they order, the bigger the discount they can receive. Additionally, this enables them to use the same interiors, providing even more savings. Furthermore, it makes it very easy if, down they line, they want to move some planes between the airlines. There is a reason that many budget carriers operate only one aircraft family type. (Usually either 737 or 320) It is extremely efficient.
KLM has always been a loyal customer of Boeing and before that Douglas. But the last 10 years Boeing struggles with .... everything. To name a few: Safety (737Max), Production Quality (especially Charleston), Production Volumes and no smooth FAA approval of new types. To top it off: Boeing management announcing that they won't innovate for the next 10 years. Which of those issues can also be linked with Airbus? When the A350 competitor 777X will fly commercially is still unknown. Must have been a real tough decision for Air France-KLM.
Well, the window blowout on Alaska Airlines sure isn't going to change their minds any time soon...
Boeing lost the plot after building the wonderful 757/767 pair and also the 777 - particularly the dash 200F and 300ER. But since then it’s been something of a disaster. As you say it’s quite difficult for an airline to change types but if they can’t get the product they need from the incumbent manufacturer they will. Currently Boeing seems totally unable to produce aeroplanes reliably without intermittent production shutdowns or at least slow downs. I started my civilian career on the B757-200 which was (is) a wonderful jet. I was dragged scream and yelling to the A320 which at that time wasn’t wonderful. But I soon realised that the Airbus products, particularly the 330, were far superior to the Boeing products. I finished my career on the B777 and came to see that, while a very capable aeroplane, it was very antiquated in many, many ways. Very sad turn of events for a famous old company.
All the 3 reasons you presented to explain why KLM took A350 instead B787 are really silly :
1. Range: the air space restrictions against Russia won t last forever,
2 : Price depends on the volume negotiation with Boeing and Airbus, not if one has lower peice list than another,
3 : Delivery time doesn t mean the final criteria for choosing Airbus or Boeing, it depends more what you already have in your fleet
The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has now lasted 9 years, even if sanctions were only put in place last year. Apart from something radical happening in Russian politics the war does not look like it'd end anytime soon. And Russian leaders are wanted for crimes against humanity.
If I was an airline, I would not count on the sanctions dropping during lifetime of an airframe.
The A350 is a no brainer over the 787.
In answer to the question at 11:08 - yes, they did. For all the better economics, performance, and other factors in its favor, the A350 is also a very beautiful machine. Those wingtips are part of its elegance.
Hey Cody! Thanks for a great video as usual. In terms of this video, do you think the 789 is too small? That should easily cover the distance between Amsterdam and South America, South Africa?
It’s too small; KLM flies B777 on that route currently.
Buenos Aires Ams on B787 currently
low capacity for pax and cargo
@@ElCuervodeSanlo Ah yes, I was only referring to the South Africa flights.
Not only size is small but also payload. I remember some routes are 1-stop routes, that means the aircraft has to carry passengers and cargo from 2 destinations. A bit too much for 787s.
Flown with KLM since I've been a small child always Boeing. Their beautiful Boeing 747 was always a pleasure. But I've flown Airbus and they're planes are great as wel. A-380 is very impressive.
I can imagine that having one type of plane across the two companies makes life a lot easier for everyone.
The B777X does not have the range, burn more fuel and cost more than the 350 because it’s not a new plane, new engines and wing mainly…Boeing loves doing new with old but this time they lost.
KLM should order a 12 A350-1000 and b 787-10 to expand and maintain lh routes to asia with a350x and 787x to increase current routes with 787-x
Latest update - Air France KLM are buying into SAS, it's thought largely to use Copenhagen as a new hub and take pressure off Amsterdam. That counts against the 777-9 argument that KLM would need more capacity at Amsterdam.
If I had placed the order knowing they would also be replacing the A330's, I would have ordered the -8 for replacing the -200's as both already operate the 787-9. While the A350-900's can easily replace their 777-200ER's, they would be getting some replacements too large for them. I think an eventual KLM order for the -9X would also be iffy, as EASA does allow for concurrent type ratings for the A320 through 380.
You’ll probably find they didn’t go for the 77X-8 due to big delays in the program plus the amount of extra training needed for the existing A330 pilots.
Plus going down this route gives them time to evaluate how the A350s fit in with their routes and gives them chance to decide that when the time comes to replace the 777-200s and 300s do they go for the 777x or get more A350s
Fleet commonality can be good for like all the reasons Cory says but if something like the 737max groundings happens again, last thing you want is for your whole fleet to be grounded.
Air France-KLM did the right decision. With the on going manufacturing flaws on Boeing planes, we cannot sure how many new 787s delivered are poorly made, might affecting the safety of the general public.
And a single crash can absolutely devestate a carrier.
The 787s aren't “poorly made.” if the QC issues posed a significant threat to the plane’s safety, regulators would've stepped in.
Over 1000 787s delivered , have you heard of any customers complaining about their 787?
this is actually really smart and by the way you are a very good youtuber you make boring stuff into extremly interesting topics
Hopefully the livery will look good on the A350 for KLM
That livery looks good on every plane. Love that light blue KLM aesthetic
One thing to note about KLM is that their 747 fleet was largely combi 747’s meaning that the airplanes were rarely filled to the max with passengers, but rather some of the passenger capacity of the 747 was used for extra cargo. KLM has always had a large cargo division. So I don’t think KLM has a problem finding a large enough aircraft in the current Boeing/Airbus lineup to meet the passenger only demand seat-wise. I’m sure if the 777 is offered in a combi variation like the 747 was that it would make the 777 an extra interesting airplane for a cargo-heavy airline like KLM
If delivery times were a concern for KLM I doubt the 777x makes sense. That plane have been delayed so often that it's the poster child of uncertain delivery times major customers like emirates have already complained about the endless delays.
Emirates is better off with Airbus anyway and once they get their A350s who cares about the old and noisy like a truck 777.
Amazing video Cody!
its Coby
One thong you mentioned in this video is very inaccurate and kinda misleading: AF is an airbus airline when you look at AF as whole company, but once we talk about long haul fleet AF is and always has been the Boeing airline. Majority of wide bodies are Boeing made.
4:40 - You could have phrased this stronger. “As KLM has to be able to reach the countries part of the Kingdom of the Netherlands in South America” because that’s why KLM will always need long rangers. They **need** to service the Islands.
No Surprise that Air France had a lot of Airbus aircraft given their main assembly line is in Toulouse. I would suspect that Price was the primary motivating factor, with everything else being secondary deal sweeteners. By combining orders, the group would be in a stronger position to get a better deal then buying individually
Great video, Coby! COngrats on your 1st anniversary of being a full time creator!
no 4 could be that boeing is a hot mess right now and their planes have had so much issues that maybe coupled with 1,2,3 it was time for klm air france to reign in differences
A clear advantage of the a350 is that it is possible to install a 3-4-3 config, I dont think they will opt for a 3-4-3 config at the moment, but it always good to have the option if it becomes mainstream.
I don't see how that's any clear advantage, probably had no influence on the decision to get the 350 anyway
Considering that Dutch authorities will start charging passengers for transit, there might be a reduction in passengers
Greenie meanies
Probably not, at least not on long-haul flights
also the door doesn't randomly open in the middle of the flight.