Earlier in 2023, Turkish Airlines revealed that it was nearing an aircraft order for up to 600 jets, which would be one of the biggest aircraft orders in history. Even though Turkish Airlines is already huge, the airline has big growth plans, and wants to double in size in the next decade (by 2033).
Then in November 2023, the airline revealed that it was preparing to place a large order for new Airbus aircraft. There’s now a major update, as the order is official.
In this post:
Turkish Airlines places huge Airbus jet order
Turkish Airlines has confirmed on its investor relations webpage that the company is preparing to purchase up to 355 aircraft from Airbus, comprised of 230 firm orders and 125 options. This includes the following aircraft:
- A firm order for 60 A350-900s, plus options for an additional 20 A350-900s
- A firm order for 15 A350-1000
- A firm order for five A350Fs, plus options for an additional five A350Fs
- A firm order for 150 A321neos, plus options for an additional 100 A321neos
The intent is that these planes will be delivered between 2026 and 2033, though we don’t have any exact details about the timeline of each individual aircraft type beyond that.
Turkish Airlines’ current fleet consists of all kinds of planes. Narrow bodies include A319s, A320s, A320neos, A321s, A321neos, 737-800s, 737 MAX 8s, 737-900s, and 737 MAX 9s. Wide body aircraft include A330-200s, A330-300s, A350-900s, 777-300ERs, and 787-9s.
My take on Turkish Airlines’ fleet renewal
Turkish Airlines currently has a serious issue with fleet consistency. Not only does the airline have so many different types of aircraft, but there’s even passenger experience inconsistency within each fleet type. With that in mind, I’m really happy to see this new order from Turkish Airlines.
Turkish Airlines going all-in on the A321neo for narrow body jets is a sensible decision. The airline already ordered 92 of these, so the fleet could eventually consist of nearly 350 of these planes. The A321neo has great economics, and given the size of Turkish Airlines’ network plus the company’s goal of doubling passenger count, it makes sense to focus on the larger variants of narrow body jets. Turkish’s A321neos are very comfortable planes to fly, and I imagine any future delivery jets will have similar interiors.
When it comes to the A350, the airline has already ordered 36 of these, so when all is said and done, Turkish Airlines should have the world’s largest A350 fleet. The only thing that potentially surprises me is that Turkish Airlines is only picking up 15 of the larger A350-1000 variant. That seems like a really small fleet for such a big airline.
I suspect we’ll also see a Boeing order from Turkish Airlines soon. I think it’s a given that the airline will pick up more 787s, though I hope we also see some 777Xs ordered, as they would be the largest planes in Turkish Airlines’ fleet. Perhaps the airline didn’t go all-in on the A350-1000 because it’s banking on the 777X.
Bottom line
Turkish Airlines has confirmed that it has placed an order for up to 355 Airbus jets, including 230 firm orders and 125 options. Two-thirds of those are for the A321neo, while around one-third are for A350s, with the airline picking up a lot more -900s than -1000s.
What do you make of Turkish Airlines’ Airbus order?
The A330 Neo is fantastic airplane at a good price. Almost identical performance as the 787 on the most common routes but a much better price and with better dispatch reliability. Even the A330 CEO remains a reliable nice quiet airplane.
And yet it's been outsold almost three to one, by the 787, even if only looking within the time frame that it's been available. So something's not adding up, for most airlines.
This is called THINKING. Unlike Ass-Zule retiring A350s. Very weak and soft typical 2023 crap.
What does "thinking" have to do with whether or not Azul retires a type (with high resale value/demand) that they don't have a specific need for? Seems a fairly logical decision.
Is it possible we will see TK phase out the A330s (all variants) and 777-300ERs , as they add more A350s?
Wouldn't be surprised to see more 787s ordered to replace the A330s, with the 773ERs replaced by either more A35K or a potential 777X order.
Turkish Airlines has great focus and discipline on unit economics which is crucial to succeed financially in aviation world both in sunny and rainy days. That's why they want to operate plane variants that offers best unit economics within their type such as A350-900 within 350 family, B787-900 within 787 family. Thus, it's no surprise to me seeing A350 orders were heavily a359 skewed and a350K is only there to serve routes that's not feasible...
Turkish Airlines has great focus and discipline on unit economics which is crucial to succeed financially in aviation world both in sunny and rainy days. That's why they want to operate plane variants that offers best unit economics within their type such as A350-900 within 350 family, B787-900 within 787 family. Thus, it's no surprise to me seeing A350 orders were heavily a359 skewed and a350K is only there to serve routes that's not feasible with a359 such as Australia, Chile etc.
Are those planes capable of flying to Australia? Seems like would open a lot of new one stop routes between Europe and Australia
Non-ULR A350-1000s have an advertised range of 8,700 nm (Qantas’ ULR variants go 1,000 nm further). So yes, they should be able to reach Sydney & Melbourne just fine.
Question is would Australian regulators allow them to expand? They’re unashamedly protective of Qantas. Not even Qatar Airways has been granted extra flights, and they were very good to Aussies during ‘rona.
The 9,700nm figure is for the (defunct) A350-900ULR, which only Singapore has, in passenger configuration anyway.
Fairly certain that the marketing range for the "Sunrise" A350-1000s hasn't been publicized yet.
did you not just post on the other thread that Airbus now offers the same fuel capacity on the 283 tonne A350-900s as was on the A350ULR?
Like many widebodies, both the -900 and -1000 have considerably more fuel capacity than is possible with a "standard" mixed international configuration. What has made the A350 family unique is that Airbus keeps upping the MTOW which allows more and more passengers to be carried even when...
did you not just post on the other thread that Airbus now offers the same fuel capacity on the 283 tonne A350-900s as was on the A350ULR?
Like many widebodies, both the -900 and -1000 have considerably more fuel capacity than is possible with a "standard" mixed international configuration. What has made the A350 family unique is that Airbus keeps upping the MTOW which allows more and more passengers to be carried even when fuel tanks are virtually full.
AA's 777-300ER flying DEL-JFK, UA's 787-9 flying DEL-EWR both for over 18 hours recently and DL's A350-900s (not even the 283 tonne versions) flying JNB-ATL for over 17.5 hours all have the range but not the ability to carry a full load.
Airbus killed the 350ULR by offering the same 280 tonne MTOW on "standard" A350-900s and then exceeding that in now current versions.
They just hiked the -1000 MTOW by another 3 tonnes which, probably allows it to fly 30 minutes longer than the A350-900- both well over 17 hours - with standard configurations. QF will get even more range out by reducing the number of seats just as SQ did with the ULRs.
Airbus sales people are clearly trying to sign a few deals before the end of the year and the TK deal is a big one.
TK configures its A350-900s on the dense side so they don't need a huge number of -1000s. They have a fairly young fleet of 777-300ERs which are fairly densely configured.
Add in the concern about durability and on-wing time on the Trent XWB97s on the A350-1000s and TK probably knows it is cheaper to order a relatively small fleet of them.
What's the word on this supposed A350-1000 deal from Delta?
Hadn't you previously said it was imminent?
I know DL doesn't like holding for shows, but if Airbus is indeed "desperate," then shouldn't we be hearing something about this right around now? (though I suspect their fiscal/sales year doesn't follow the calendar year)
Not sure if you are trolling or serious but I have long said that Delta will order when it has to.
Given that their widebody order book only goes to 2026 and that is for only 3 A350-900s, I expect they have to order soon.
Given that Rolls-Royce is fixing some of the engines on the Trent XWB97 and DL said all along they wanted to stick w/ the A350 and A330NEO instead...
Not sure if you are trolling or serious but I have long said that Delta will order when it has to.
Given that their widebody order book only goes to 2026 and that is for only 3 A350-900s, I expect they have to order soon.
Given that Rolls-Royce is fixing some of the engines on the Trent XWB97 and DL said all along they wanted to stick w/ the A350 and A330NEO instead of ordering the B787 in order to get access to the GEnx engine for overhaul purposes, I expect that DL will order A350-1000s right now.
I expect they will order a bunch of A330NEOs with GEnx engines to be delivered after 2030 when Rolls' exclusivity on the A330NEO expires but they don't need to order them now. The GEnx is very similar to the Trent 7000 on the A330NEO.
It is interesting how many airlines will have fleets of over 75 A350s so soon after the aircraft began service. A dozen or more airlines are headed for fleets of 75 or more A350s.
What are these dozen airlines, I can only count about 6 or so.
I expect they will order a bunch of A330NEOs with GEnx engines to be delivered after 2030 when Rolls' exclusivity on the A330NEO expires but they don't need to order them now.
Who's going to pay for that, with an aircraft that (thus far) has failed miserably with network carriers outside of DL and MH?
That'd be like PW investing in the 764ER circa 2005, after it was clear nobody else wanted it.
first, you do realize that Airbus only spent about $2 billion to develop the A330NEO which makes it one of the least expensive derivative aircraft - also explaining why Airbus is reportedly selling the A330-900 to Delta for less than $100 million per copy, far less than what Boeing can sell the B787 for or Airbus can sell the A350 for.
second, the A330NEO has sold about 325 copies which is vastly more than...
first, you do realize that Airbus only spent about $2 billion to develop the A330NEO which makes it one of the least expensive derivative aircraft - also explaining why Airbus is reportedly selling the A330-900 to Delta for less than $100 million per copy, far less than what Boeing can sell the B787 for or Airbus can sell the A350 for.
second, the A330NEO has sold about 325 copies which is vastly more than the 764 or 77L.
third, DL has made no secret of its desire to grow its MRO business and add the GEnx to its portfolio. The GEnx is very similar to the Trent 7000 which is the bleed air version of the Trent 1000 which is also offered on the 787.
fourth, DL has scores of its remaining 767-300ERs and 400s to replace in the next decade plus some early A330s within a few years after that if not sooner.
It is very likely that A330NEO sales have been hurt because of Rolls' problems on the Trent 1000 which entered service before the Trent 7000 on the A330NEO.
There are still hundreds of A330CEOs in service. Airbus could easily sell hundreds more A330NEOs and having a GE engine could help them gain sales.
As for the A350-1000 order, if DL orders 20-25 which is now rumored, DL has clearly settled with Rolls and/or Airbus for better pricing A350-1000/Trent XWB 97 pricing, additional overhauls on the Trent 84 which powers the A350-900 which DL is authorized to overhaul, and/or Airbus and/or Rolls is giving other concessions elsewhere including potentially giving up exclusivity on the A330NEO earlier than planned.
Anish,
whether it is 6 or 12 is much less of a concern for me but I do think there could be a dozen operators of the A350 by 2030 with 75 or more A350s.
And given that DL will be within 5-10 aircraft of 75 aircraft with an A350-1000 order and they are likely to get options to add more or buy more used aircraft, DL could be in that category.
The A350 is on its way to being Airbus' top selling widebody and TK's vote of confidence in the model proves just how good Airbus got it with the A350.
There are still hundreds of A330CEOs in service.
But almost entirely with either (1) tiny airlines or (2) carriers who've already made their choice to replace them.
In fact, IINM, Cathay is the only major network airline with a large A330 fleet that hasn't publicly chosen a successor-- and there's every possibility that they could go 787 (like CI did) or order more A350s (like SQ did) instead of choosing the -NEO.
One could...
There are still hundreds of A330CEOs in service.
But almost entirely with either (1) tiny airlines or (2) carriers who've already made their choice to replace them.
In fact, IINM, Cathay is the only major network airline with a large A330 fleet that hasn't publicly chosen a successor-- and there's every possibility that they could go 787 (like CI did) or order more A350s (like SQ did) instead of choosing the -NEO.
One could argue that losing the EK order, tolled the bell for the A330NEO at more major carriers-- especially when you had airlines (e.g. HA) publicly stating that they didn't want to get stuck with an oddball aircraft family that few others wanted.
So it just brings us back to the question of: "who the heck is going to pay to add an engine type to an aircraft with potentially VERY limited sales prospects, particularly with major airlines?"
You do realize that the majority of A330NEO sales have been to small airlines?
Do you honestly think Cathay Pacific is the only large remaining operator of A330CEOs?
Let's see what Delta, Airbus, Rolls and GE come up with for the 767 replacement, most of which are not on the order books and won't be announced in this order.
I trust you'll be willing to admit I was right if Delta manages to talk Airbus into letting GE put its engines on Delta's aircraft.
You do realize that the majority of A330NEO sales have been to small airlines?
BETTER QUESTION: do you realize that I've been saying that throughout this thread?
Do you honestly think Cathay Pacific is the only large remaining operator of A330CEOs?
I said, with the clear caveat that I may be mistaken, that CX seems to be the remaining large operator who has not yet publicly announced a replacement.
I trust you'll be willing...
You do realize that the majority of A330NEO sales have been to small airlines?
BETTER QUESTION: do you realize that I've been saying that throughout this thread?
Do you honestly think Cathay Pacific is the only large remaining operator of A330CEOs?
I said, with the clear caveat that I may be mistaken, that CX seems to be the remaining large operator who has not yet publicly announced a replacement.
I trust you'll be willing to admit I was right if Delta manages to talk Airbus into letting GE put its engines on Delta's aircraft.
Meh, sure... though I haven't actually taken a stance on it in either direction, beyond simply asking who's going to pay for such.
Lots of airlines still have lots of A330CEOs. Cathay has 42, China Southern has 31 in service, Air China 44, China Eastern 52, Hainan 25, Qantas 23, Garuda 14, Air Canada 14 (and growing), Turkish 55, Malaysia 21, AirAsia X 14, Delta 64, Iberia 22, Swiss 14, Aer Lingus 10, Discover 13, and that's largely ignoring European airlines like LH, SK, and AY that are phasing them out.
Now, some of those airlines have...
Lots of airlines still have lots of A330CEOs. Cathay has 42, China Southern has 31 in service, Air China 44, China Eastern 52, Hainan 25, Qantas 23, Garuda 14, Air Canada 14 (and growing), Turkish 55, Malaysia 21, AirAsia X 14, Delta 64, Iberia 22, Swiss 14, Aer Lingus 10, Discover 13, and that's largely ignoring European airlines like LH, SK, and AY that are phasing them out.
Now, some of those airlines have already announced replacement plans for those planes, but that still leaves quite a lot out there (that's 450+ right there), many in mainland China which hasn't been on the best of terms with the US and thus Boeing recently.
If your thesis is that the A330NEO has been a commercial failure, or constitutes a dead aircraft type walking - neither are true. Several other airlines are positioning themselves to use them as their future backbone in addition to DL and MH, such as TP, GA, AD and AZ. And the role of the 330NEO was never to be a volume seller - it was merely to offer a replacement option for the existing 330CEOs and undercut / compete with the 787 so it didn't walk away with the market. In other words, the A330NEO is a wet blanket for the 787, much like the 747-8i was a wet blanket to the A380. Plus, as pointed out, it was cheap to do - Airbus had little to lose.
HA had previously ordered the A330-800, which *has* sold in extremely small volumes and is a questionable choice given that, and EK might have 'placed' an order for the A330NEO but it never intended to actually take them - that was a protest order against both Boeing (calling their bluff for better pricing) and likely some statement against the A350 too. If you look at Emirates' history they have a habit of doing this (I find it pretty funny, since it usually gives insight into boardroom discussions).
Had it not sold at all, it would be a failure, but each sale you see for it is likely one the 787 didn't get, and also means it's more likely that, should an airline need something bigger, they will choose the A350 thanks to the shared type rating.
thank you, EC.
Delta and Air Asia pushed for the A330NEO as a low acquisition cost means to get new engine technology on a lightly modified existing and successful airframe - the A330CEO -and Airbus delivered.
Airbus spent about $2 billion on A330NEO development while Boeing spent more than 10X that amount on the 787 including all of the delays and production issues which included huge amounts of customer compensation. Part of the...
thank you, EC.
Delta and Air Asia pushed for the A330NEO as a low acquisition cost means to get new engine technology on a lightly modified existing and successful airframe - the A330CEO -and Airbus delivered.
Airbus spent about $2 billion on A330NEO development while Boeing spent more than 10X that amount on the 787 including all of the delays and production issues which included huge amounts of customer compensation. Part of the reason why UA has ordered such a huge amount of 787s is to "burn" that customer compensation but they have also limited the amount of new delivery slots that Boeing has. Airbus spent half to develop the A350 as Boeing spent on the B787.
There are still plenty of A350 production slots because Airbus is increasing production; they have largely delivered their widebodies on time other than supply chain issues including by Rolls Royce, something Boeing can't say. Airlines want the certainty that they can use their airplanes when they are promised.
And, yes, Haakon, GE already has a bleed air version of the GEnx but GE is also enhancing the engine just as Rolls is doing on the Trents in its lineup. The Trent 7000 on the A330NEO is just a bleed air version of the Trent 1000 on the 787. If Rolls can make the changes to its engines, GE can do.
Delta wants the GEnx in its MRO portfolio. It already is licensed to overhaul the Trent 1000 on the 787. There is enough remaining demand on the A330NEO that Airbus and Delta will both see value in putting a GE engine on the A330NEO.
The question is not if but when. Delta's largest widebody replacement cycle could be pushed back until 2030 unless Rolls gives up exclusivity on the A330NEO earlier.
Delta appears to have secured terms it now likes and will place a fairly large order for the A350-1000. Whatever is in those terms remains to be seen but, unless Rolls is giving up exclusivity on the A330NEO early, DL doesn't need to place a large A330NEO order early.
It is not uncommon for Airbus or Boeing to sign deals and hold them pending customer announcement for a month or so and still record them within the next month or so. The A350 has had a great sales year and Airbus might like to drag out announcements into 2024 to keep the momentum going. The next timeframe for an A350-1000 order announcement from Delta will be their 4th quarter earnings release in Jan 2024.
@EC,
And, in keeping to what was actually written-- almost every single one of those airlines you mentioned, has publicly announced (and in a majority of them, started taking delivery of) a successor.
So what was the point of that?
Wishful thinking, GE is not wasting it's time with the a330neo , they won't go out of their way to develop a non-bleedless GEnx derivative just for delta . If delta wants MRO rights for the GEnx they , will have to order the 787 , any other thing is fantacy and fiction
They already have a non-bleadless GEnx, it was used on the 747-8.
They already have a non-bleadless GEnx, it was used on the 747-8.
Exactly. But it'd still have to be certified for the A330, so yet again, that brings us back to: who's going to pay for it?
I firmly suspect that the answer is "no one," but I'm more than open to (fact-based) correction.
first, the GEnx-2B engine for the 747-8 is smaller and less powerful than what is used on the 787-9 which is almost identical to the Trent 1000 in performance. There isn't an exact engine to "drop in" on the A330NEO but GE has a similar thrust engine to the Trent 7000 engine on the A330NEO and also a bleed air version of the GEnx - they just aren't the same engine.
And the simple...
first, the GEnx-2B engine for the 747-8 is smaller and less powerful than what is used on the 787-9 which is almost identical to the Trent 1000 in performance. There isn't an exact engine to "drop in" on the A330NEO but GE has a similar thrust engine to the Trent 7000 engine on the A330NEO and also a bleed air version of the GEnx - they just aren't the same engine.
And the simple answer as to who will pay is the engine manufacturer. The airframe manufacturer solicits proposals from airframe manufacturers and that is what GE would do - if they are given the chance.
Do you know that GE proposed offering the GEnx on the A330NEO when it was developed but it, along w/ Rolls Royce asked for exclusivity?
Rolls won that contest but both the RR and GE engines are similar to what is offered on the 787 so neither is going to be left out if Airbus ends Rolls' exclusivity on the 330NEO. While the GEnx has won the majority of sales on the 787, Rolls is still getting sales for the Trent 1000 on the 787.
It is up to Airbus and GE to decide if there is enough market to add the GE option - or give GE exclusivity for the next 10 years or more - but given how similar the 787 and 330NEO engines are, the development cost is not near as big of an issue as you make it out to be.
The question is to end Rolls-Royce' exclusivity and when.
There are still A330CEOs to be replaced and Airbus is selling 330NEOs to airlines that never operated the 330CEO on top of growth for the industry.
As with many things, put a bookmark on this conversation and see if I was right in 5 years or so. Even if RR doesn't agree to end exclusivity early, GE will have the choice to offer an engine by 2030.
GE will have the choice to offer an engine by 2030.
Perhaps they will, but I'm going to suggest that they'll see it, laugh, and run away as fast as they can.
Love traveling on the A330NEO, but its sales have been a comparative turd, and that doesn't look likely to change. I still contend that retroactively losing the EK order was the beginning of the end for it, as a competitive sales prospect.
Sure...
GE will have the choice to offer an engine by 2030.
Perhaps they will, but I'm going to suggest that they'll see it, laugh, and run away as fast as they can.
Love traveling on the A330NEO, but its sales have been a comparative turd, and that doesn't look likely to change. I still contend that retroactively losing the EK order was the beginning of the end for it, as a competitive sales prospect.
Sure it's sold over 320 units, but its direct competitor within the same 2014+ time frame, outsold it by more than 2.5x and counting...
...and that's before you factor in potential customers who said "neither," and went with another aircraft (e.g. A350); and that there's not many large customers left who haven't made the choice for A330CEO replacement already.
What incentive would GE have to spend money to get involved with that?
If nothing else, it'd make far more sense for them to get on an airframe that customers actually WANT (i.e. the A350-900) which is not a party to the RR-exclusivity on the A350-1000.
it is precisely because the 787 and A350 are selling so well that a relatively inexpensive option still exists.
As others have noted, on 12-13 hour flights, the A330-900 delivers operating costs as good as the 787-9.
And if you do the math, Airbus' $2 billion investment on the A330NEO has yielded a far greater return than Boeing's on the 787 or Airbus' on the A350 so far.
All are great airplanes...
it is precisely because the 787 and A350 are selling so well that a relatively inexpensive option still exists.
As others have noted, on 12-13 hour flights, the A330-900 delivers operating costs as good as the 787-9.
And if you do the math, Airbus' $2 billion investment on the A330NEO has yielded a far greater return than Boeing's on the 787 or Airbus' on the A350 so far.
All are great airplanes and GE will sell engines where it can.
It is precisely because the engines are so similar between the A330NEO and the 787 that putting GE engines on the A330NEO will be so inexpensive.
stay tuned.