Emirates’ current situation might just be the clearest example of how the aircraft manufacturer duopoly leaves airlines choosing between the lesser of evils, rather than something they’re actually excited about…
In this post:
Emirates reportedly plans to order 30+ A350-1000s
Until recently, Emirates had a really streamlined fleet, consisting of Airbus A380s and Boeing 777s. No airline loves the A380 as much as Emirates, though unfortunately even Emirates’ commitment to order more of the planes wasn’t enough to get Airbus (and a partner) to invest in new engines, and keep production going.
Emirates’ initial plan was to rely almost exclusively on the Boeing 777X for fleet renewal, since that’s the largest aircraft that’s expected to be manufactured in the future. The airline has 205 of these planes on order, and desperately wants to take delivery of them.
The issue is, Boeing can’t actually get the plane certified. While it was supposed to enter service in 2020, it has now been delayed by at least seven years, so it’ll enter service in 2027 at the earliest. With every passing year, it seems like we’re one year further from the plane entering service.
So Emirates has had to get creative in recent years, and order other aircraft. We’ve seen Emirates order 65 Airbus A350-900s (which have already started to join the fleet). We’ve also seen Emirates order Boeing 787-8s and 787-10s, though that almost feels likes a placeholder order that can be negotiated, rather than anything else, given the lack of a firm delivery timeline.
Well, it sounds like Emirates might be planning on yet another new aircraft variant soon. Bloomberg is reporting that Emirates is in advanced talks to order at least 30 Airbus A350-1000s, with options for more. So this would be the larger variant of the A350, complementing the existing A350-900s. An agreement could be announced in the coming days, at the Dubai Air Show.
So there are no guarantees, but it sounds like this could very well become a reality sooner rather than later. It’s the latest example of Emirates just not knowing how to deal with the seemingly never-ending 777X delivery delays.
Emirates would order A350-1000s in spite of criticism
The Airbus A350-1000 is an incredible plane for passengers, and it has amazing per-seat economics. So you might be thinking to yourself “well that sounds like a great fit for Emirates, why hasn’t the airline already ordered this plane?”
Well, Emirates doesn’t think so highly of the plane. Emirates executives have long criticized the A350-1000, with Emirates President Tim Clark in the past having called the Rolls-Royce engines on the plane “defective.”
The turbines on the A350-1000 have overly frequent maintenance cycles, making reliability of the aircraft an issue. This is especially rough in the Middle East, where hot weather puts even more strain on the plane (including the engines).
Rivals Etihad Airways and Qatar Airways both fly the A350-1000, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have issues with the plane. For example, Qatar Airways has elected not to order more A350s, and has instead recently placed a huge Boeing aircraft order.
Rolls-Royce has been working on improving the performance and durability of these engines, as part of a $1.3 billion investment. In testing, the company has even been spraying sand into the blades, to simulate conditions in the Middle East. We’ll see what comes of this, but it’s hard to rely on something that isn’t yet a sure bet.
Bottom line
Emirates is reportedly nearing an order for at least 30 Airbus A350-1000s. While the airline really wants the Boeing 777X, that plane has now been delayed by at least seven years, so Emirates can no longer rely on the plane for growth.
Emirates has already started taking delivery of some A350-900s, and may now pick up the bigger variant as well. The issue is that the A350-1000 has serious engine durability issues, which are especially bad in the Middle East, given the climate.
It really is a sad state of affairs for aircraft manufacturing, eh? Though in fairness, in this case it’s the engine manufacturer rather than the aircraft manufacturer as such.
What do you make of Emirates’ potential Airbus A350-1000 order?
Neither Qatar, nor Eithad have stated they have a problem with the Trent XWB, yet you repeat a lie
With all Boeing and GE's problems they still lead the wide body (WB) contest. Boeing has a 53% larger WB backlog than Airbus. GE claims to power 75% of airline flights and has 54% of the WB engine backlog.
Delivered/Orders
777X: Zero/565
787: 1,229/1,048
TTL backlog: 1,613
350: 682/765
330neo: 173/291
TTL backlog: 1,056
now tell us not only the number of widebodies that each of Airbus and Boeing are delivering and have delivered over the past 5 years but also the total order book and deliveries.
Boeing has long been the global leader in widebodies; at one time it had 3 widebody models being produced at the same time -the 747, the 767 and the 777.
Airbus built the A380 as a vanity project to try to prove...
now tell us not only the number of widebodies that each of Airbus and Boeing are delivering and have delivered over the past 5 years but also the total order book and deliveries.
Boeing has long been the global leader in widebodies; at one time it had 3 widebody models being produced at the same time -the 747, the 767 and the 777.
Airbus built the A380 as a vanity project to try to prove what it could do with widebodies -and EK and the ME3 carriers bought most of the A380s that were ever built and yet the program flopped commercially.
Airbus not only built a far better A320 30 years after the first Boeing narrowbody jet but has managed to stretch the A320 to do more than Boeing will ever get out of the 737 - there are more A321NEOs on order than the entire MAX order book.
And Airbus also bought the A220 which is a solid little airplane that does what Boeing couldn't do even though Boeing tried to kill the C Series.
all of which still gets down to the same bottom line as is true for airlines; neither Airbus or Boeing are financially very profitable companies but Boeing is still working off tens of billions of cost overruns and delays on the MAX, 787 and 777X programs; they have discounted their products for years to come as customers like United have cashed in billions in compensation on new orders. Airbus is simply delivering far closer to on-time than Boeing and is profitable.
The A350 or Rolls Royce engines are not defective; all new generation engines are needing heavy maintenance far more than was promised and far more than previous generation engines. Materials and manufacturing techniques used to deliver higher performance are simply not keeping up. GE, Safran, Rolls Royce and P&W are all improving their engines in order to improve reliability but they are all catching problems on the ground and keeping problem engines out of the sky which is a huge tribute to how well engine performance is monitored.
EK can try to gets some 35Ks but they will likely only get them soon by converting 359s to 35Ks or will wait years for new delivery slots to open. an order for 30 aircraft is simply not going to sway Airbus to open up early delivery slots.
Ever heard that you are long on words and short on data especially for a so-called, "analyst"?
for someone that claims to be an expert, it doesn't even require pulling up a webpage to know that Airbus produces more aircraft, has a larger backlog, and makes more money than Boeing.
There are precisely two western large jet commercial aircraft manufacturers. It isn't hard to know the facts.
Airbus leads overall, in narrowbodies, and profits.
Boeing leads in widebodies but is not profitable.
"defective" engines fly on an airframe that is...
for someone that claims to be an expert, it doesn't even require pulling up a webpage to know that Airbus produces more aircraft, has a larger backlog, and makes more money than Boeing.
There are precisely two western large jet commercial aircraft manufacturers. It isn't hard to know the facts.
Airbus leads overall, in narrowbodies, and profits.
Boeing leads in widebodies but is not profitable.
"defective" engines fly on an airframe that is actually in service even if the engines need to be repaired more often - just like what happens on every new generation engine.
Boeing can't even get the 777X or the MAX 7 or 10 certified.
If you want to prove me wrong, post the facts.
Otherwise, accept that you, once again, cherrypick in order to avoid a reality which you don't want to admit.
Who claims to be an expert? You claim to be an 'analyst'. Hilarious. Comedian?
in the amount of time you spent trying to argue against me you could have looked up Airbus' orderbook and backlog:
Breakdown of the backlog (as of July/August 2025)
Total: 8,754 aircraft
A320neo family: 7,128 orders
A319neo: 25 orders
A320neo: 1,823 orders
A321neo (including A321LR and A321XLR): 5,280 orders
A350: 759 orders
A350-900: 438 orders
A350-1000: 256 orders
Freighter: 65 orders
A220: 506 orders
in the amount of time you spent trying to argue against me you could have looked up Airbus' orderbook and backlog:
Breakdown of the backlog (as of July/August 2025)
Total: 8,754 aircraft
A320neo family: 7,128 orders
A319neo: 25 orders
A320neo: 1,823 orders
A321neo (including A321LR and A321XLR): 5,280 orders
A350: 759 orders
A350-900: 438 orders
A350-1000: 256 orders
Freighter: 65 orders
A220: 506 orders
A330neo: 285 orders
Key takeaways
The backlog is substantially larger than Boeing's, largely driven by the high demand for the A320neo family.
The vast majority of the backlog consists of narrowbody aircraft from the A220 and A320 families, which is a trend that has continued over the years.
The large backlog means Airbus can continue to maintain its leading position in the commercial aircraft market.
I am not "arguing against you." It is common knowledge that Airbus has an overall backlog advantage over Boeing. This article is about Sir Tim possibly ordering 'defective' A350-1000s among other wide body aircraft.
TD, the master (self) debater?
don't deceive yourself.
You are the one that started this thread trying to compare Airbus and Boeing's widebody orders - which, of course, is the last thing that Sir Tim cares about in pondering a 35K order.
I was merely pointing out that 787s and Boeing wide bodies are more popular with airlines than A350s other Airbus wide bodies unlike Ben and others in this conversation.
Don't deceive yourself you are still OMAAT's master (self) debater.
and yet the size of Airbus or Boeing's widebody order books isn't the topic of this article. You are the one that went down that path and then want to lash out when someone points out to you that, not only does Airbus lead in total orders but also makes more money and has been consistently delivering more total airplanes.
and the 787 entered service long before the 330NEO or 350 even though the 787 ended up being grounded for a period of time
And the Airbus aircraft entered service before the 77X. The comparison between the 787 & 350 came up organically in this and other OMAAT conversations master (self) debater.
well, no, you brought it up by arguing about the size of Airbus and Boeing's entire widebody order books
and the 777X is NOT in service so everything that is flying has entered service before the 777X.
You love to stir the pot until someone serves you the soup you have made
Most misleading aviation article of the year!
RR have already certified and introduced into service phases 1 & 2 out of a 3 phase upgrade programme for the Trent -97 engine. The major phase (phase 3) implements the HTP blades, cooling system and material coatings. This is anticipated for Q1 (2028) for in-service.
Preliminary feedback is already that the planned 50% TOW is likely to be much higher once testing is finished.
...Most misleading aviation article of the year!
RR have already certified and introduced into service phases 1 & 2 out of a 3 phase upgrade programme for the Trent -97 engine. The major phase (phase 3) implements the HTP blades, cooling system and material coatings. This is anticipated for Q1 (2028) for in-service.
Preliminary feedback is already that the planned 50% TOW is likely to be much higher once testing is finished.
This is a disappointing article that lacks substance and facts. The A350-1000 is and always has been a great aircraft with very few operators having any problem whatsoever with it.
The A350-1000 is truly number 1 for passenger experience. Hopefully RR can iron out the engine issues
I think that Qatar Airways was gently “invited” to order Boeing instead of Airbus. After your president visited the aerea, there was a wave of Boeing orders… who knows…
I believe this article is to malign rolls Royce , I am sure they will fix the issues and make it a reliable product sooner than u think. 778x is unproven yet and a350 1000 with re xwb 97 are being used for the last 7 years . Out of Middle East these engines are performing g to the expectations…
Any particular reason you believe Ben's article set out to malign RR? Rather a harsh choice of words. One should choose words carefully, after first engaging brain.
Rolls Royce published or rather made a comment yesterday about improving the Trent XWB97 time on wing by about 50%.
That improvement package started flying early this year, but was certified late last year.
Another improvement package is in the works for certification by 2027 with EIS by 2028. This improvement package should allow the XWB97 to match or even exceed the XWB84 time on wing performance.
If this is true and...
Rolls Royce published or rather made a comment yesterday about improving the Trent XWB97 time on wing by about 50%.
That improvement package started flying early this year, but was certified late last year.
Another improvement package is in the works for certification by 2027 with EIS by 2028. This improvement package should allow the XWB97 to match or even exceed the XWB84 time on wing performance.
If this is true and not just a publicity/marketing stunt, I believe it's logical for a carrier to order the A350-1000 now with expected delivery being in 3 years time, 2028. It doesn't make sense till the improvement start flying before placing an order, as widebody orders need at least a 3 years lead time from order to delivery.
Very helpful, thank you!
If Clark is right a 50% improvement would mean 50% of the on wing time in the ME environment that Emirates is looking for. I bet you're right about the lead time and the next improvement package.
So I had time to do a little bit more research.
https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/discover/2025/trent-xwb-97-less-maintenance-more-flying.aspx
The first link is from Rolls Royce around April of this year.
https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/aircraft-propulsion/rolls-royce-sees-positive-results-trent-xwb-97-dust-tests
https://www.flightglobal.com/engines/rolls-royce-trusts-in-dust-as-trent-xwb-97-durability-upgrades-exceed-expectations-in-testing/165291.article
The other links are from 2 days ago.
Knock yourself out if you want to.
So I had time to do a little bit more research.
https://www.rolls-royce.com/media/our-stories/discover/2025/trent-xwb-97-less-maintenance-more-flying.aspx
The first link is from Rolls Royce around April of this year.
https://aviationweek.com/aerospace/aircraft-propulsion/rolls-royce-sees-positive-results-trent-xwb-97-dust-tests
https://www.flightglobal.com/engines/rolls-royce-trusts-in-dust-as-trent-xwb-97-durability-upgrades-exceed-expectations-in-testing/165291.article
The other links are from 2 days ago.
Knock yourself out if you want to.
That excuse no longer flies, the 777X Is coming out next year so it is NOT about the A350 being delivered sooner. Emirates needs both the A350-1000 and the 777X.
“… the 777X Is coming out next year…”
Really? According to whom?
The 777x I'd coming out next year has been a statement we have heard various flavours of since 2018. And still, no 777x. And even if it were "out", that does not mean that production volumes would match customer expectation.
Emirates will wait several more years until they have sufficient 777x in their fleet for it to make a difference on the commercial side.
I’m sorry say but you are making assumptions after assumptions, and you the article is clearly slanted. The A350-100 is far from defective and has sold well outside the Middle East and the engine issues will be fixed- just like the 787 battery issues were fixed. perhaps also they are very happy with the -900?
Emirates is the master at negotiation tactics ad as far as I’m, the only defective airfract at the moment mentioned...
I’m sorry say but you are making assumptions after assumptions, and you the article is clearly slanted. The A350-100 is far from defective and has sold well outside the Middle East and the engine issues will be fixed- just like the 787 battery issues were fixed. perhaps also they are very happy with the -900?
Emirates is the master at negotiation tactics ad as far as I’m, the only defective airfract at the moment mentioned in this article is the 777-X which has had many more problems with its development that the A350.
Emirates need both the 777X and The A350-1000. The 777 for heavy lifting of passengers and heavy cargo on long-haul routes, the A350 for ultra long-haul flights flights with less cargo.
Sorry to say this Ben, but this article reads off as manufactured-drama, looking for a place to be had.
If (emphasis on "if") Rolls-Royce really has gotten the on-wing and reliability of the Trent-97 way up, then why WOULDN'T Emirates order the -1000, seeing as THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THEY ASKED FOR?
Isn't that the way business should be conducted? How is this an example of compromise or desperation?
Is it possible this was a long-game strategy?
Tim Clark calls out the engines early on, when it’s well known that the first generation of a new engine always have teething problems and the manufacturers make improvements. Publicly denounces the aircraft, doesn’t order it, then later on down the road is able to secure a more favorable price because it’s something they “don’t really want?”
Just spitballing a little conspiracy.
what a surprise that a certain someone doesn't like the A35k being called "defective" when it represents his entire future outlook and internal happiness with Delta.
there are multiple people that called out the article and you, the only defect, inserted Delta into the article.
hey fishy fishy fishy
Tim, you're too easy. Is there any lure you don't bite on?
Do you really identify so easily how much of a loser you are without even being named? ;)
nothing fishy.
Delta wasn't mentioned in this article about DL.
You DESPERATELY want to be the center of attention and couldn't stand to just let the article and its comments play out.
yet here you are replying to me... ;)
I have never said that I will ignore you or anyone else
I have said that you should ignore me if you are so concerned about all the attention I get.
Let's be clear that YOU are the one that threw DL into the conversation trying to create drama which only exists in your head.
I will call you out every day and twice on Sundays when you, as usual, childishly jump into a topic
...I have never said that I will ignore you or anyone else
I have said that you should ignore me if you are so concerned about all the attention I get.
Let's be clear that YOU are the one that threw DL into the conversation trying to create drama which only exists in your head.
I will call you out every day and twice on Sundays when you, as usual, childishly jump into a topic
Just walk away, max. YOu have proven over and over that you have nothing to contribute to this or any other discussion
and five more paragraphs to reinforce how obsessed you are with me.
You're far too easy to lure in over absolutely nothing.
You literally recognize yourself in an insult and respond to it, idiot...
I didn't bring Delta into the conversation, Max, and then try to pin it on me.
You once again can't see what everyone else does which is that you are obsessed w/ me and not the other way around.
None of which changes which I said in the first place with no mention of DL that the issues with the RR engines are largely a result of operating in the desert. Other 35K operators such...
I didn't bring Delta into the conversation, Max, and then try to pin it on me.
You once again can't see what everyone else does which is that you are obsessed w/ me and not the other way around.
None of which changes which I said in the first place with no mention of DL that the issues with the RR engines are largely a result of operating in the desert. Other 35K operators such as CX, BA and VS aren't complaining about reliability - but RR is still rolling out improvements while Airbus is further enhancing the airframe itself.
It is likely that a higher percentage of 35Ks will be delivered in 2026 than any year since the 350 program began due to improved engines and a more capable airframe.
the A350 is simply the best very to ultra long range aircraft on the market - and Airbus is delivering it while Boeing has yet to certify the 777X and the 787s is years behind schedule
and rebel,
my statement applies to you today
:)
Tim
it truly is funny to see you squirm and attempt to reply back when you bit so hard on a lure and now are completely caught being a loser that can even identify how big of a loser he is and reply to it. ;)
Truly dude... give it up. You're so tragic. Even Ben uses you as a joke in articles ;) If that doesn't help you realize what a laughing stock you are... who knows what will
you can try to shift the blame for your own stupidity but you are the one that brought Delta into the conversation; it wasn't a bait but an attempt to distract from the conversation which everyone else - except you - has been able to discuss.
In typical fashion, you can't and don't participate in the actual discussion because the only reason you participate in aviation social media is because you are paranoid that someone...
you can try to shift the blame for your own stupidity but you are the one that brought Delta into the conversation; it wasn't a bait but an attempt to distract from the conversation which everyone else - except you - has been able to discuss.
In typical fashion, you can't and don't participate in the actual discussion because the only reason you participate in aviation social media is because you are paranoid that someone else will say something that you are incapable of understanding, let alone saying.
YOU are the laughing stock, Max. The sooner you recognize that everyone else sees you for the fool that you are, the sooner you might decide that you are better walking away.
The topic is the A350 and its Rolls-Royce engines as hard as it is for your pea-sized brain to comprehend.
It isn't about Delta or any person.
Do you think you could track w/ the conversation, mini?
TD says, "I have never said that I will ignore you...I have said that you should ignore me..."
Clark claimed the XWB-97 engine only stays on the wing for 1/4 of the time (2,000-2,500 hours) Emirates needs before it requires maintenance.
So why are airlines ordering and flying planes they claim are defective?
I don’t believe these planes are defective at all. The engines just may have lesser performance than hoped for or need maintenance more often that desirable from a financial viewpoint. They work fine. I’m not sure I’ve heard of a major incident with an A350.
You are confusing reliability and availability. By all metrics used by professionals in the field, the A350 is a bloody reliable aircraft.
Such click-bait / misleading title.
Pretty sure if Tim Clark reaches an agreement it will be with the improve engines.
There isn't a fan of aviation that shouldn't be amazed at the engineering that goes on in modern jet engines which are expected to operate flawlessly for the better part of a day and be more efficient than any other form of transportation over long distances.
the Rolls Royce issues seem to be an issue w/ the desert. Many airlines use the 35K outside of the Middle East and make it work. Sure, Airbus...
There isn't a fan of aviation that shouldn't be amazed at the engineering that goes on in modern jet engines which are expected to operate flawlessly for the better part of a day and be more efficient than any other form of transportation over long distances.
the Rolls Royce issues seem to be an issue w/ the desert. Many airlines use the 35K outside of the Middle East and make it work. Sure, Airbus and Rolls-Royce are selling to Middle East airlines but Rolls Royce is fixing the problems.
the bigger issue is that EK bet on the A380 and it was an economic failure for Airbus and then put their cards on the next largest airplane - the 777X - which has been a customer nightmare. Given that EK's business plan is all about being a mass high end airline, losing the "mass" has implications for EK's future
And apparently Etihad is apparently considering placing an order for A330neos which is more surprising.
Airbus can deliver them fairly quickly and do so at lower prices than other new widebodies. The 330NEO is a decent medium sized widebody
And just to refresh your memory heh:
"The 787-9 has greater range but it is not needed for 350 operators, of which CX is one of the largest.
The 787-10 is larger and more cost-efficient than the 339 but overlaps with the 350.
It is very unlikely that many airlines will order both the 787 and an A330/350 combination."
Yeah i took last year Delta A330 Neo from FCO-JFK and its an excellent plane very quiet, refined and comfortable.
330 Old technology meant for budget airlines. And for Tim's favorite airline
“hard to rely on something that isn’t yet a sure bet.”… because the 777-X is???? My comment is more towards Emirates more than anything… they don’t want the “lesser evil” and would happily take the complete unknown blindly!
While hindsight is always 20/20, Airbus agreeing to give RR an exclusive on manufacturing A350 powerplants was a huge mistake. Shutting out GE, CFM, and P&W may have sounded good at the time, but from a risk management standpoint, it seems like some of the calculations and assumptions were wide off the mark.
Question: Will the A350-1000s have a first class product, or will biz. be the highest class of service?
@ TravelinWilly -- It's anyone's guess, though I'd have to imagine that it will have first class, and will be used for long haul, high demand routes.
@TravelinWilly
You´re wrong. The fact of the matter is that GE did not want to provide an engine for the A350-1000 that would compete with the 777-300ER and their GE90-115B engine. IMO, that was a massive blunder and it the biggest strategic mistake GE Aerospace has ever made.
"The problem we have with GE is they go to Seattle and say, 'What kind of engine should we design for your airframe?'" said Leahy. "Then they...
@TravelinWilly
You´re wrong. The fact of the matter is that GE did not want to provide an engine for the A350-1000 that would compete with the 777-300ER and their GE90-115B engine. IMO, that was a massive blunder and it the biggest strategic mistake GE Aerospace has ever made.
"The problem we have with GE is they go to Seattle and say, 'What kind of engine should we design for your airframe?'" said Leahy. "Then they come to Toulouse and say, 'Here is the kind of airframe you need to build to fit our engine.'"
https://www.aero-news.net/emailarticle.cfm?do=main.textpost&id=740080EF-2DD1-4C82-AFE5-284390FFAD20
Hindsight is rarely 20/20.
I think this is overstating the issue with the RR engines used in the A350-1000. The only issue as far as I know was the fuel line problem that Cathay Pacific had which resulted in an AD for all airlines to inspect the engines for fuel components. None of the other airlines which have inspected the engines have reported a problem.
It would be a stretch to call this an engine reliability issue (as if...
I think this is overstating the issue with the RR engines used in the A350-1000. The only issue as far as I know was the fuel line problem that Cathay Pacific had which resulted in an AD for all airlines to inspect the engines for fuel components. None of the other airlines which have inspected the engines have reported a problem.
It would be a stretch to call this an engine reliability issue (as if there is a chronic problem) and call their durability into question.
The blog seems to be getting a bit too click-baity in headline narrative. Like the "mysterious revocation of global entry".
Just friendly feedback.
They have the same issues a lot of modern turbofans have, where they're operating on thin margins to get maximum performance.
Reliability comes down to more frequent inspections required to monitor early deterioration of sensitive components like Turbine blades, with durability looking at the overall life of these and other Crtitical parts.
The updates shared in this article might have just been enough to get Emirates over the line
https://www.flightglobal.com/engines/rolls-royce-trusts-in-dust-as-trent-xwb-97-durability-upgrades-exceed-expectations-in-testing/165291.article
They have the same issues a lot of modern turbofans have, where they're operating on thin margins to get maximum performance.
Reliability comes down to more frequent inspections required to monitor early deterioration of sensitive components like Turbine blades, with durability looking at the overall life of these and other Crtitical parts.
The updates shared in this article might have just been enough to get Emirates over the line
https://www.flightglobal.com/engines/rolls-royce-trusts-in-dust-as-trent-xwb-97-durability-upgrades-exceed-expectations-in-testing/165291.article
Did the people angry about the title even read the article? “Defective” is in quotes because it is exactly the words Tim Clark used to describe the a350-1000 before deciding to order it.
Boeing has really found themselves in quite a pickle with all their delays.
So many 777x customers must be furious.
Boeing might as well scratch the 777-X and start afresh.
Has any plane in modern times ever delayed EIS this long?