Airbus accumulated many A350-1000 orders with new customers since January 2023: Air India (20), Delta Air Lines (20), EVA Air (18), Turkish Airlines (15), Air France KLM (11), Philippine Airlines (9), and Air Algerie (2). Boeing only had one new customer: Air India (10). Boeing though received a large follow-up order from Emirates.
Despite spending heavily on large twin-aisle aircraft with the A340-600 and A380, Airbus did not manage to seriously challenge Boeing’s best-seller 777-300ER. The European OEM launched the A350-1000 and modified it to add significantly more range to challenge the 777-300ER.
How do the A350-1000 and passenger 777X compare now?
Very different customer profile
If we sum all firm orders and in-service aircraft, the 777-8/-9 has a 398 tally, while the A350-1000 has 272. The Boeing large aircraft leads with 59% market share.
However, there are 10 passenger 777X customers (including 1 unidentified) and 20 A350-1000 ones (including 1 lessor). The HHI index (Herfindahl–Hirschman index) of the A350-1000 is 7%, compared with 30% for the passenger 777X.
The 777X has a far more concentrated order book. Excluding the largest order for each, the customer base becomes 248 for the A350-1000 and 193 for the 777-8/-9. Emirates represents 52% of the passenger 777X order book, while Qantas is 13% of the A350-1000 order book.
Six airlines are both A350-1000 and 777-8/-9 customers: Qatar Airways (82 orders and in-service), Etihad Airways (45), Cathay Pacific (39), British Airways (36), Air India (30), and Lufthansa (30).
Conclusion
Which one is better? While the 777X has accumulated more orders, it is with a far more concentrated customer base. It is not surprising because the larger 777-9 has a market appeal with fewer potential customers. 777X customers need a critical mass of trunk routes to justify ordering the aircraft.
The threshold to order the A350-1000 is lower. It is usually with existing A350-900 operators. A350-1000 customers tend to have fewer trunk routes than 777X ones.
Which program is in a better situation? This blog believes it is will much easier for the A350-1000 to accumulate orders with new customers than the passenger 777X. The only solid prospective 777X customer in this blog’s opinion is Korean Air. With a broader customer base the A350-1000 can potentially receive more follow-up orders.
Whether the A350-1000 can cath the 777X largely depends on the fleet decision of the big three Chinese carriers: Air China, China Eastern Airlines, and China Southern Airlines operate a combined 71 large twin-aisle aircraft.
EPSILON AVIATION 
We could also look at the tally a different way. In 2023 Airbus got 95 orders to Boeing’s 10, a difference of 85 planes. If the trend continues like this, by early 2025 Toulouse will be ahead. We could also say that over the last 5 years 777-X’s sales have been very slow, namely 2018: 0, 2019: 18, 2020-1: 0, 2022: 12, and 2023: 10. Total 40 units over 5 years, 8 per year on average.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Another near-term problem for the 777X is the large certification delays. There are no delivery slots available before 2029 unless Boeing does a second-to-none twin-aisle production ramp-up. A350-1000 slots are available in 2026 per Delta’s order.
LikeLike
Not to mention the longer 777X is delayed, the more time Airbus (and RR) can improve their offerings. 777-9 was superior to or match A350-1000 by almost all metrics other than weight when it was launched, but right now maybe only cabin / undercarriage space is the only area it can still lead. Boeing and GE should be thankful RR didn’t have the resources to PIP Trent XWB.
LikeLiked by 2 people
The A350-1000 has more than enough range now with the 322 metric tons MTOW variant. It now needs RR to improve the Trent XWB 97 durability.
LikeLike
There is another metric, perhaps even more worrying for Boeing. Etihad has 25 orders, Emirates 205 and Qatar 74, for a ME3 total of 304 units, or 3/4 of the total. An unprecedented market concentration.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Your statement is correct that the 777X order book is heavily concentrated in number of customers and regionally skewed towards the Middle East. There’d better be no prolonged civilian airspace closure for the program’s sake. it is also worth mentioning that the 777X orders are overall sketchier than the A350-1000: Etihad is unlikely to take delivery of any and Cathay might convert to the 787 (we’ll know in a few months). The only sketchy A350-1000 customer is Ethiopian Airlines due to the (civil) war in the region.
LikeLike
From someone in airliners.net (lightsaber?), the rule of thumb is that, 20 operators with 400 orders is the minimum to ensure economics of scale for support.
Assume it is true, 35K alone has the diversity but lacks some volume, but as new customers come and current customers top-up it’s probably a matter of time it can establishing itself, that aftermarket suppliers, lessors and airlines should have more confident in it. Meanwhile, 777X already have the mass but lacks the diversity, and it’s an open ended question whether Boeing can eventually achieve diversity.
But 35K is a variant of a bigger family consisted of 359 and 35F, while 777X is a standlone program (aberit derived from hugely successful 777), so the threadhold for 35K may actually be lower. It sounds like Airbus can afford to be more aggressive earlier, or maybe they’ve already been more assertive.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The A350-1000 will likely ultimately get to 400 orders. A number of existing customers will place large follow-up orders, notably AF-KLM (AF-KLM has 59 777-300ERs), Lufthansa with Swiss, etc. That’s without counting future customers.
For the 777X is is going to be impossible to reach 20 customers on the passenger variants alone (I realistically see 3 more customers at best). The 777X will though get to 20 customers with the freighter.
Airbus has definitely been more aggressive on A350-1000 sales campaigns. They have a golden opportunity to increase market share with the 777X delay (who knows what will happen with the latest 737-9 problem on certifications). The only thing is that RR is not willing to be as aggressive.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It would be interesting to put A350F and 77XF into the picture. We know that 35F is largely similar to 35K other than cargo specific requirements and fuselage length. Meanwhile 778F now shares the same base design with 778 pax. The success of the freighter programs would improve the economies of scale of their respective passenger siblings and the program as a whole, especially for 777X, which has a smaller overall backlog.
LikeLike
correct A350-1000/A350F and 777-9/777-8F prospective customers will optimize their choice based on the combined pax + freighter network.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think I’ve come to an understanding of what the 777X will be. The passenger versions will sell like 500 units but from the same small customer base.
It will be like the A380 except its users will actually love it and as you can see already (place repeat orders)
So here’s the thing in terms of customers? The 777X won’t have more than 15
But it will get the volume it needs to be successful.
Some customers I see are Korean, Air Canada, (I still see Air France (they have no -1000s coming in atm and Ben Smith has said they’re looking at the 777-9 to replace the 300ER, also he doesn’t want Air France to be an all Airbus airline since they’re taking out the 787) it won’t be more than 15-20 frames but the remaining 300ERs will be 35k, 779 will replace 300ERs with first
Also rumours that ANZ are looking at it to replace the 300ER after demand returned better than expected
Lufthansa has another 20 options to replace the 20 747-8s in the fullness of time
BA has another 24 options, with slot constrained Heathrow and a large fleet of 380s and 300ERs you know that’s a given
By the time you add all that it will be 500 jets
Emirates has already done the needful to take it to 205
And unlike during Covid, the order book is now firm again with the only leakage coming from Etihad.
Same customer base as 380 but much more loved by carriers.
Carriers that used the 380 have ordered the 777-9 in significantly more numbers.
The 777-8 will also never happen
LikeLiked by 1 person
I should add the 777X passenger version won’t get more than 15. The freighter can possibly add another 10 users
LikeLike
actually AF will take 11 A350-1000s starting in 2026 to replace older 777-300ERs. With options for more.
LikeLike
That’s KLM not AF. AF remains with the 350-900 for now
LikeLike
Oh interesting so presumably to replace the 777-200ERs? Do you have an official press release I did not see anything.
LikeLike
oh i see https://www.airfranceklm.com/sites/default/files/2023-12/Air%20France-KLM%20Investor%20Day%202023%20vEN%20-%20141223_0.pdf
LikeLike
I’m less optimistic to 777X’s prospect
.
– Some of the A380 operators shouldn’t have ordered VLAs in the first place. That includes China Southern as well, it just doesn’t have the route structure and nod from the CCP to support a VLA despite its mammoth size.
– Even those who can profitably fill an A380 is better off using smaller planes moving forward. Qantas is moving to a p2p network with the Project Sunrise and 787s, while Lufthansa’s then CEO once said he’s not sure if they “have not ordered too few A350s and too many Boeing 777Xs”. So as Cathay with the questionable future of Hong Kong and its surprised 350F order.
– AF / KLM Group doesn’t only fall in the same category of above, but also soon to have almost 100 A350s in the group. It’s starting to enjoy an economies of scale similar to United and Emirates, but with A350. Ben Smith also seems to favour commonality over dual-sourcing, given AF / KLM is the only European giant that say no to 737MAX, despite having a large 737NG fleet. Air France is a tough call when Boeing’s offer to KLM and cargo division were both turned down.
– Among big 777 operators the situation isn’t any better. Forget Chinese and Russian given the geopolitics, and some others would at least replace some 777s with A350s and smaller aircraft, if not all.
– Even for those who haven’t and favoured Boeing wideboies, 777X is big. I can’t imagine how Air New Zealand can fill a 400-seat 779, or Air Canada can pack half thousand passengers onto a plane. EVA had already decided they couldn’t. Maybe try Korean and Saudia / Riyadh.
– Boeing should have better luck selling to cargo operators, just that this time Airbus is close and closer.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I agree that the only remaining solid potential passenger 777X customer left is Korean Air, which is awaiting the outcome of the Asiana merger process to make decisions on the A380/747-8 replacement. China Airlines or Riyadh Air would require some serious political arm-twisting as the 787-10s and A350-1000s are better for those two carriers on merit.
Worth noting that Boeing put an accounting quantity of 500 units for the 777X. It means it conservatively estimates it will sell 500 777-9s and 777-8Fs. I think it is realistic with the freighter. It is probably a stretch for the 777-9 alone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Like he said most of the additional sales for -9s will come from the existing customer pool. So I can see the -9 (which has 390 orders) end up around 500 jets. The freighter can pull in another 200-300 jets.
The program hasnt even entered service and it’s already at 453 orders. So I believe it will sell very well overall
People make this argument that because it’s heavier than the 350-1000 it’s not as efficient but well that’s why it has more efficient engines and aerodynamics to compensate for the weight. The fuel burn between the two really isn’t that different and I know that for a fact.
The reason the 35k is pulling in so many orders is because Airbus has taken a sizeable cut on their margins to try Jam Pack the market with the 35k to limit 777x sales.
Additionally the 777X is not here that’s the problem. Not it’s capacity or capabilities or efficiency
Unless RR can seriously improve their time on wing, after the -9 comes into service the 35k will fight for every single order because the 9X is on track to hit GE90 time on wing numbers.
Why do you guys think Boeing & GE are so comfortable giving emirates a 777X for two months this upcoming summer? In the peak of the Middle Eastern heat, something rolls never did and still aren’t willing to do. Why do you think emirates was so comfortable to order another 100 jets irrespective of the delays? Because the fundamentals of the jet are bullet proof.
I hear BA is looking at their 24 options quite seriously, so let’s see.
Other operators just want certainty and that certainty only comes with a certified jet.
EIS remains on track for May 2025
LikeLike
A lot of what you say makes sense, most new orders will come from the existing pool (Emirates started). At the end of the day whether the A350K or 779 is better depends on the airline’s network and how well each respectively fits. As you rightly say they are close enough in fuel burn, not like the 777-300ER vs A340-600 where the former crushed it. It is the same for the A350F vs 777-8F, both very close in fuel burn. Your point about Trent XWB 97 durability concerns is valid, RR will need to step up its game, but the GE9X hasn’t entered actual commercial service, it is just testing, so durability needs to be confirmed despite GE and Boeing’s confidence. Airbus now has a window of opportunity to accumulate more A350K sales because there are no 777-9 delivery slots before 2030.
Regarding your statement that EIS remains on track for May 2025 I am skeptical given the recent certification history of the 737 MAX variants and the A321XLR. The 777-9 hasn’t yet received type inspection authorization (TIA). Even if it receives (TIA) it next week 15 months is really tight to get the certification + first delivery done. This ain’t the 70s/80s/90s anymore, there is a lot more regulatory scrutiny.
LikeLike
Re KAL, maybe it’s a glass half full or half empty argument, but my take is:
– A fair share of 777X delays are caused by GE9X.
– Though not as catastrophic as Trent 1000, GENx is not problem prone either. It has been plagued with icing issues, and that caused a few engine shutdowns and subsequent groundings. Last incident happened on an Etihad 789 in Dec 2023, so seems not solved yet.
– The simple fact that a significant edge in unit cost is needed for the larger aircraft to win over smaller one, because of the risk of not filling the extra seats. 777X can’t even beat a similar sized A350 (only the larger variant can match or slightly exceed 35K), let alone the market leading 787-10, which is smaller. 77W could at least match 333 while outperforming almost any longhaul aircraft in the market.
– Emirates is more an exception than the norm.
– On the other hand, among heavy 77W users Cathay, EVA and Turkish have at least half of their replacement covered by 35K already, while Qatar, despite its dispute with Airbus, requested reinstallation of 35K order instead of heading straight to Boeing asking for more 777Xs.
– A few smaller users have ordered more than enough 35Ks to ditch 77W altogether, including JAL, Ethiopian, Biman, Etihad and PAL. Without a significant growth it’s unlikely for the 777X to win. Do note that except PAL, most are either loyal Boeing customers, having 787-centric widebody fleets, or both.
LikeLike
… Air Canada took delivery of a 300ER in 2023. AC has routes that need a large frame.
… All of this talk about ANZ, Air China….. let us not forget to follow the money. The big daddy market on this planet is transpacific. Period.
…I am sure Project Sunrise is important to Australia. However, that route does not come close to New York London.
LikeLike
Re CJARED, when it comes to Transpacific, payload is just as important as capacity. Especially for the Asian side, as many of the big players are also top cargo airlines. Unlike United, EVA shows no desire to fly 78J beyond 10-hour SEA, while others in the region don’t even try.
777X has no clear advantage in payload versus 35K, while Epsilon even suggested that 35K currently has the edge. Project Sunrise isn’t just about ULH, but also more revenue payload for longhaul routes and freighters.
It’s very different from Transatlantic, where even a 737MAX is capable of a few routes.
LikeLike
Interesting link. No 787-9 for Air France by 2030? Will they be transferred to KLM?
LikeLike
Maybe once they are due for a major maintenance overhaul. Half of them are on operating leases so AF-KLM can also decide not to extend the leases. It will depend on how many 787-9s KLM needs.
LikeLike
The A350-1000 will be a good 773ER replacement, it has the alomost same PAX (perhaps 10-20 less), greater Range, and about 20% fuel efficiency, and it can be delievered soon.
The 777-9 has about 50 more Pax than A35k, it is more a A380/747 replacement. Airlines (except the big ME3), which want to replace there 773ER with 777-9, they shall make sure if there is enough capacity to full the big machine.
LikeLiked by 2 people
your comment is spot on! There are A350-1000 delivery slots in 2028 (maybe late 2027) while new 777-9 delivery slots aren’t available before 2030.
LikeLike
I should also add. The nearest available 777-9 slot is 2027. Not 2030.
EIS target is currently May-25. Whether they meet it. We will see.
TIA is expected end of the month and flight testing schedule is currently 9 months.
777-9 does not need any exemptions to meet latest safety standards
Boeing has also had to significantly derisk and mature the aircraft so that TIA can be given. Unlike previous test campaigns where the FAA gives TIA early on and then fixing issues happens as certification flights are happening.
So our current expectation is that straightforward path till EIS. The only thing that can complicate that is if a new problem arises. Which seems a low risk at this point given the plane has been flying for 4 years and redesigns have already happened and been tested on both engine and airframe.
It’s a great airplane and I think one that both airlines and passengers will love.
The program overall will probably do about 700-800 orders which is actually good and about in-line with the 747-400
And 300 orders short of the 777 2nd generation (200LR, 300ER, 200LRF)
350-1000 is a brilliant aircraft as well. Top drawer machine. Both and their freighters will sell well but the current dynamics of the widebody market won’t change with Boeing holding over 60% with the 787 selling the way it is. Now just 90 frames short of 2000 orders. It’s already the best selling widebody in history.
LikeLike
I agree that combined with the 787, which sells an order of magnitude better than the A330neo and better than the A350, Boeing will handily keep the twin-aisle market share lead with this current generation of aircraft (A330neo/A350/787/777X). Thank you for providing all those 777X details. Time will tell whether your 700-800 prediction for 777X orders including the freighter plays out but it is plausible.
LikeLike
1,727 Boeing 777s were delivered during a time when both the A380 & 747 were available as an alternative very large plane. I do not think it is controversial to believe Boeing has already run the rough specifications for a version 10 of the 777X. Thus…. 800 frames seems low. The 777 has been delivered since 1995, think about all the old frames that need to be replaced at carriers already flying the 787.
LikeLike
… Background. Airbus and Boeing, a perfect duopoly in twin aisle planes, were in a HUGE trade war until recently. The end result? BOTH players must attribute development costs to aircraft sales. Neither the EU or Washington can subsidise development costs. Does anyone doubt that the EU and US Department of Trade are watching both Airbus & Boeing for compliance?
… Why is this important to this discussion? Just listen to Airbus recently complaining that pricing on twin aisle planes is very competitive… of course it is. Boeing has almost delivered enough 787s, thus attributed development costs, to start lowering the price. Airbus is not even close to delivering enough A350s. In fact, they have legacy A380 development costs that must be attributed/ written off.
… This is why Boeing decided NOT to pursue a “clean sheet” design for the 777X… much lower development cost to attribute over sales. Not like the massive costs for the clean sheet 787 & A350.
… Crew are expensive to train and employ. The 787, moving forward, will be the chosen plane because of price. Crew on 777s and 787s share “almost’ commonality. Greatly lowering both training costs and continued certification costs. Not to mention when a 777 pilot gets sick, a 787 pilot can jump in.
Therefore, if we want to look at the potential of the 777X, we must start with all the carriers that are building fleets of 787s. Will the 787 success continue? Pricing says yes. Follow the money.
Carriers will choose fleet commonality, 787 is the workhorse. 777x for high volume, biggest money routes. London New York. London LAX…etc….
LikeLike