Great move! The Airbus A350 is absolutely stunning in every aspect. Advanced technology, fuel efficiency, spacious cabin, and comfortable passenger experience. Well done!
You forgot to mention that KLM is also transitioning from the 737NG to the A321Neo. Pilot commonality between Airbus types is much better than between Boeing types.
Boeing is in such a sad state. They have lost their reputation hard earned over decades of making great products. All of the McDonnell Douglas management and its philosophy needs to be exorcised out of Boeing. Hopefully, it is not too late.
You have no idea what you are talking about name one person from MD in Boeing management. The merger was 27 years ago. And if the merger was so MD influenced why were MD airplanes killed off in favor of Boeing. The 787 is not a A350 competition it’s a A330 sized aircraft. The 787 is a 767 replacement. Airbus isn’t bringing new innovations to the market like Boeing they Introduced one new aircraft in the last 20 years. Everything else was re engined jets This is being over blown on RU-vid because people like this guy need stories to write about. Without ever spending one day working in aviation.
It’s not a sad story… Boeing earned it themselves by cutting cost and putting money in front of safety. The are digging themselves in their own hole. Real story from a 737-800 pilot: The 737 was an amazing aircraft in the 60s, but Boeing turned it into a beast by always increasing fuselage length and putting larger engines that don’t even fit under the wings. On the 900 variant, if you rotate with a speed of more than 2*/sec, you are having a tails strike…
@@MiturBinEsdertyWait. 1 in the last 20 years? The A380’s first flight is in 2005, and the A350 newer than it. That makes 2. Boeing on the other hand has only the 787. Am I missing something?
@@sirisobhakya Ok goof 19 years if I take your date of first flight not when the A380 was announced developed and built. And they lost over 20 billion on that project. It was the largest amount lost on an aircraft in aviation history. And I wasn’t saying that Boeing had more new aircraft introduced. You are missing something INTELLIGENCE.
You’re misinforming people into thinking KLM don’t already have a TON of 787s. So it’s not like they’re choosing the a350 over it, it’s just an addition
The 787 absolutely is not going anywhere, nor is KL saying goodbye to it. The 787 competes with the A330/neo, not the A350. KL has 772 and 773 in their fleets, and those will need to be replaced eventually. And that's where the A350 comes in. The A359 competes with the 772/778 and the A3510 competes with the 773/779. With the 778/779 so incredibly delayed (and who knows if there may be more), and because of all the other advantages highlighted in the video regarding the A350 series, it makes sense to go with the A350. The 787-10 is at best a 772 replacement, and as said in the video, its range is very lacking. Boeing needs to get an -ER version to compete, although with all the problems at the company at the moment designing an ER variant is not exactly priority. They need to go back to making safe planes, period. I wouldn't be surprised if KL makes a top up order for the 787, particularly the -9. I also wouldn't be surprised if they get more A350s, both the -900 and -1000. But anyway, the 787 will continue to be a mainstay and workhorse in the KL fleet.
Boeing was not obviously paying attention to each plane manufactured! It’s a shame, the board of directors need to take responsibility here as well. They need a major overhaul and the unions need to step up as well, their personnel and Boeing management at the floor level have created chaos for themselves. Airbus is being attentive and keeps on building!!!
KLM has been the most loyal Boeing customer. The fact that the dutch carrier is switching its preferences to the european manufacturer goes beyond the price/technical differences between the two aircrafts. Boeing is a company not to be trusted anymore and a serious airline cannot afford to put its business at risk because of it. Well done KLM!
@@colinbrown9549 yes my friend, in its recent history KLM proudly stated to have an all Boeing fleet introducing its firs A330 in 2012 only. True that in the past they made use of different manufacturers as well
@@d8889 KLM have been operating A330's from 2005 to this day, they operated DC10's and MD11's from the early 70's to 2014 a and DC8's and DC9's from the 60;s tomnthe 80's, I'm not sure KLM have ever been a Boeing only customer
@@colinbrown9549Probably my english is not good enough to explain myself. All I wanted to say is that KLM has in modern times had a privileged relationship with Boeing. I am aware that it has had aircraft produced by other manufacturers in its fleet. Personally I miss the old MD11s!
Clickbait title implies KLM is disposing of their 787s which is not correct. The 787-10 was never designed to have equivalent range to the 787-9 or A350. It's primarly intended for shorter routes which need higher capacity.
Their is an interesting fact that no one mentions and no one seems to get, especially Americans. Holland and Canada are unofficially and officially very close, as close as nation states can be. This comes from the liberation of Holland by Canadian Soldiers in WW2 and the Dutch Royal Family living in Ottawa during World War 2. Queen Beatrix attended Primary School in Canada and her sister Princes Margaret was born in Ottawa in 1943. While the Dutch Government may have refrained from comment no doubt they noticed when Boeing attempted to kill the Bombardier C Series and drive Bombardier into bankruptcy . It was Airbus, not Boeing, that eventually supported the C Series now called the Airbus A-220 100 & 300. People in both America and Europe should note that schoolchildren in Holland still look after the graves of Canadian Soldiers and large immigration to Canada from Holland followed World War 2. A whole lot of factors likely influence the decision for KLM to prefer a European builder. Boeing's inferior aircraft construction and quality control are but one factor to be considered. At this time Boeing is simply throwing together aircraft in an effort to reduce costs. Now the world knows this!
As a Dutch citizen and passenger, I’m very happy with the KLM switch to Airbus. I’ve flown quite a bit around the world with both brands and I find Airbus simply to be the better and more comfortable plane to travel in. So job well done for our KLM.
Boeing is an amazing company with a remarkable legacy, it's really unfortunate so see the current situation they are in. I believe that everybody would benefit from a healthy Boeing able to keep pushing the envelope to make flying more sustainable while maintaining a top notch safety track record. This being said, the current commercial success of Airbus is well deserved.
"Boeing has worked hard to fix these problems". Utter nonsense. The ultimate source of Boeings problems is a poor culture and a lack of understanding of the costs of poor quality. Nothing Boeing has done recently shows any appriciation of the underlying source of its problems, which still remain unaddressed.
The best way to get boeing addressing those problems is to allow the US flag carriers to fly airbus planes. Boeing should like this idea, as it is an embodiment of “diversity, equity and inclusion”, which is very high on the list of boeing priorities :)
Boeing really needs an engineer to be in charge of their company and their headquarters needs to be located near where the planes are built. That's would be a good start.
@@LoneWolfSpartyDenis Muilenburg who was the prior ceo during the Max crashes WAS an engineer. Stop parroting talking points you hear from other people without doing research
@@jonw3602 I know that. Now why don't you mention as to why they made MCAS instead of a clean sheet design like the engineers wanted? I'll wait. The information is out there.
KLM made a good decision. In the last four years things have changed: that is, maybe passengers are safer flying in a A350. And it is made nearby as well.
Honestly, the 787 will stay with KLM for at least 10 years, as the huge A350 order (the majority) is destined for Air France. Air France plans to give the 10 787-9s to KLM. And I don't know if we'll see a 777x in the fleet as many airlines are putting their orders on hold because of the recent problems with Boeing. Also, there's a lot of criticism of Boeing in the French media, I think a lot of French people think Boeing is crap even though they've made some very good planes (the 777 has a long history in the Air France fleet). Just wait and see
@@ronmurray7349 btw I know klm is a long client of boeing, but air france has always buy boeing due to the French government for diplomacy with USA reason. But since Ben Smith became CEO and brought good results and profit for AFRKLM, + ecological measure in EU. It's natural that we choose EU fuel efficient aircrafts. And AF got a lot of troubles with their 787-9. When I say wait and see, I'm waiting for the 777x to see what boeing reserves us.
After the battery issues 10 years ago they have had a solid record. No hull losses or accidents with fatalities. Dispatch reliability right up there with the B777 and A380. Having said that I'd prefer to travel in one made at the Everett plant rather than the South Carolina plant...
@@brentsummers7377 You aren’t keeping up with the whistleblowers and continued quality issues! Boeing seems to be trying to SILENCE THEM PERMANENTLY 😮!!!
The 787 is the statistically safest plane ever made. 0 fatalities across more flights than any other 0-fatalities airliner. Also there isn’t any evidence that Boeing murdered any whistleblower
Of course, as with any plane, that depends on the airline and the seat configuration. I doubt that you'd find an A350 of French Bee (up to 480 seats on the A350-1000!) or Air Caraïbes (almost the same) very comfortable. But the lower cabin altitude might still make a difference on a very long flight, at least compared to another "sardine can" configuration on a different model.
KLM is not a loyal boeing airline. It never was. They flew all fokker types and all douglas types, from dc2 to md11. They flew the a310 before and currently still fly the a330. They pick what suits them best. And right now, that unfortunately isn't a boeing.
Boeing is in such disarray right now that the A350s are a way better choice for KLM. They also can use the A350s with its longest flights. I wish American or United kept their A350s but they instead took the 787
I think European carriers should support European manufacturers. Both Holland and France build components of Airbus planes, so they help to keep their nationals in work. Why send all those Euros to the USA?
Boeing certainly have their problems but you are not assessing risk in a cogent manner. Take Southwest Airlines for example. They have approx. 4,000 flights PER DAY on an all Boeing fleet. They have never had a hull loss in 52 years. Similarly, Ryanair operates approx. 1,800 flights PER DAY on an all Boeing fleet and have also had zero hull losses. If you are that risk averse, you probably shouldn't leave your house.
Boeing needs to replace the bankers and bean counters on its board of directors with actual aeronautical engineers. Back the way it started and built itself and its reputation. It’s not too late.
I would never have thought it's possible, that Boeing would fall so brutally behind Airbus. But the facts mentioned, if they are correct, speak for themselves.
Saying goodbye to the 787 implies their 787 fleet is being sold. Nothing of the kind has been announced, just because new long haul fleet is A350's the 777 & 787 will be at KLM and Air France for decades.
Comparing the range of the 787 -10 vs.airbus ,yet blatantly omits any comparison to the -9, which offers outstanding economics and range !! Another AB troll video.
True to a certain extent, but not really an AB troll video because of other vids I have seen, he is just missing some key facts. The 787 is in a class of its own and was the original game changer. The A350XWB wad an answer to the 777 domination. KLM just recently received new 787-10's. The A350 is a 777 replacement and a supplement to the 787. There would be NO A350 if there was no 787. The original A350 id now nothing more than the A330NEO.
The Good Choice. In my humble opinion the A-350 is the best plane in the sky. I think the 787 pales by comparison. I once flew Emirates on an early 787-800 and we landed in Dubai. Now I don't know if they have a badly corrugated airstrip there, but I thought the thing was going to shake itself to pieces on landing...Unbelievable...really..!! Like a bucket of bolts.
Just compare an old 747 to a 777 in regards the handling of turbulence. I been on over half a dozen flights on the 747 & never been bounced about, while it’s happened every time I’ve been on the 777
@@mickvonbornemann3824 Amazingly I had the same experience, super smooth with little turbulence on the 747 but quite a lot on the 777 and A350. Of course turbulence is caused by outside elements, but when it is consistent (at least 10 times on each type), I cannot help thinking the designs play some role here.
Too all not really watching the video and only bashing around in the comments: the KLM 787s won't go anywhere anytime soon, there are even some open deliveries. Also theres a good chance that later on Air France and KLM will operate the 777-9.
So KLM was founded in 1919. Apparently that’s really important because they repeatedly mentioned it. I’m not sure why because Airbus weren’t around then.
Air France is operating Boeing aircrafts for up to 60% of its long haul fleet. Including 10 787 Dreamliner. Saying AF is an Airbus operator and KLM a Boeing operator is not accurate
Keep in mind that, while Boeing recommends various interior arrangements, the airline determines that. "Uncomfortable and noisy" is what an airline may pick to cram more people in and save money. That's why some people love flying in a 787 and some hate it. Blame the airline not Boeing.
Nice Geweldig. Boeing is kapot aan het gaan door hun schandalen met betrekking tot hun productie en technisch overzicht. De 737MAX en 787 Dreamliner zijn gevaarlijke waardeloze vliegtuigen waar ik nooit in wil zitten
Boeing doesn’t care… where you going when Airbus is sold out? Boeing doesn’t care if they’re #2 because there is only 2. Plus the A350 is an amazing aircraft. Why buy junk if you don’t have to?
remember when the saying went "if it is not Boeing I am not going", now its all the way around, I came back from south America in a 737 max 8, I was nervous.
Its inaccurate to say Russia closed its airspace to International airlines. Many airlines still fly though Russian airspace. Only nations that have banned Russian airliners have faced reciprocal bans.
To be honest the 787 does not compete with the A350. They're in completely different categories. The 777X competes head to head with the A350 and the 787 competes directly with the A330neo.
@@XWXW-lk4jf Agreed completely. I thoughts of the A321XLR but decided not to muddy the waters. But now that you've mentioned it, you're spot on. There's a slight overlap between the A350-800 and the 787-10. At the bottom end with the 787-8 she comes up against the A321-XLR. It kind of hurts the Dreamliner in a category of its own that it gets beaten on, on every level by the competition. as the Airbuses deliver so much more.
Air France does have a lot of Airbus planes but mainly short-haul single aisle planes. They have way more Boeing than Airbus long-haul planes (71 vs 45). Another factor for KLM choosing Airbus is for sure the passenger comfort. The A-350 is just a so much nicer plane for the passengers and considerably more spacious inside. Same goes for the A-320 series vs the B-737 series
Although it is not being discussed, Boeing made a major blunder moving much of its assembly to Charleston, SC. They failed to understand the cultural issues of the region and went for the lowest labor cost. In general manufacturing in the U.S. is moving to the Southeast because the lower living costs and the lack of unions make labor costs less. That's one reason for Boeing's move away from Seattle. -But the South is not culturally uniform. Over a century and a half after emancipation, the effects of slavery still linger. In some regions slavery destroyed the work ethic for both whites and blacks. Working hard was what slaves did. That's primarily in a region where flat land and a fertile black soil called the Black Belt meant cotton grew well. -Other regions of the South, primarily those with hilly land and poor soil were populated with small independent farmers who had to work hard to survive. There the work ethic was strong along with a Scot-Irish independence. If you treated someone well, they treated you well. If you treated them badly, they responded accordingly. -Boeing's blunder was all too obvious to those who know the South. It went to Charleston, SC because labor costs there were low. It failed to realize that those costs were low because the poor work ethic made locating their unappealing to savvy companies. Charleston lies in the heart of the Black Belt and was major center for selling slaves. -Boeing could have located those new plants in Huntsville, AL where it owned over 400 acres next to the airport. The area is so technical astute it built the huge Saturn V that put NASA on the moon. But the presence of a well-education population with a solid work ethic meant labor costs would be much higher. That Boeing management hated. As we have seen in other areas, maximizing profits mattered above all else. -Boeing chose to go cheap and is now paying a price for that blunder. It is struggling to instill a work ethnic in a population that, white and black, has lacked one for two centuries and more. In endures because those who want to work hard and get ahead get frustrated with such a culture and move elsewhere. _You can read more about this in the Wikipedia article "Black Belt in the American South."_
@MrSiwilks that too is a copy paste of another video that was uploaded in Oct,2023 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-36tPQN38U7E.htmlsi=Os9UcaXf3z2pDFBX
1. Both South America and South Africa are within the range of the 787-10. Maybe not Amsterdam-Santiago nonstop, but that's currently flown with a stop in Buenos Aires (on a 787-9) anyway. The Far East with the current detours over South Asia or Alaska is a good reason to skip the 787-10, yes, but not South America and South Africa. 2. Both KLM and Air France ALREADY have large fleets of 787s (in the case of KLM, including the 787-10), not to mention even larger fleets of older 777s. What will happen to those planes in the mid- to long-term? Will they be passed on or retained along the new A350s? Plus, even the smaller A350-900 is significantly larger than the 787-9 and caters to a different market. These are questions that the video didn't approach and should have.
@@Dirk-van-den-Berg Anyone who is a true aviation fan already knows this. What the OP is saying is in fact lies....... We knew KLM was ordering A350's years ago. They are NOT to replace the 787.... They are to supplement the 787. The A350 is a 777 replacement. Their 787's tap a whole different market....
Boeing appears to be in trouble So this choice is somewhat logical in more ways than one Therefore the scene is awkward with losing such a big contract… One presumes the situation will remain fluid as new factors emerge… but Airbus seems to be ahead, herein, for the moment We live in interesting times as Russia being at war also complicates air travel routes tremendously… The saga continues❗️ 👊🔥 🪖
How do you figure that right now there are more orders for the 787 than the 350 the video said that was one of the factors. Also American and United just put in multi billion dollar orders.. Now the 737 maybe seeing the end of the line but boeing is going strong. I personally think their biggest mistake was not designing a whole new aircraft instead they decide to make the maxes which ends up killing em.
@@nicofink5678 Uhm A321 and A320 have a freighter variation, A350 has a freighter variation, A300 has a freighter variation and the A330 has a freighter variation those are the ones that can be ordered from the factory or converted.
You are talking about Alaska Airlines, Ryanair, American Airlines? They decided to go all Boeing, mostly because of financial reasons and are reaping the sour fruits from that imbalanced decision. They don't have to retrain pilots, no new groundengineers necessary, and they get a big discount for large orders.
yes, fully agree, Boeing has structure issue, they became arrogant, financial goals became Boeing #1 objective. typical USA management style, short term focus, care more stock price instead of long term benefit, and social responsibilities. not mention recent all incident. the quality just not sufficient for you to take Boeing aircraft safely.
The 787-9 has all the range any airline needs as Qantas has shown. Last time I checked Capetown & Johannesburg are 11 hours from northern Europe well within the range of a 787-10. Buenos Aires and Santiago do require a 14 hour plane though. KLM purchased the A350 because it seems AF & KLM now have common fleets strategies, KLM is also getting A321neos.
1:03 KLM was not acquired (taken over) by Air France. KLM and Air France created a "merger" (joined forces) to become one joint company. If anything, it was Air France that was struggling before the merger and unable to sustain itself. Today the merger has been deemed a great success with Air France - KLM being the largest Airline group in Europe.
I have flown in both AF AB350 and KLM B787 from Latin America to Paris y Amsterdam, respectively. B787's cabin felt a little more comfortable but seeing the range, AB350 is the way to go! Strategically, Europe's airlines should use ABs., and PLEASE, do not let Trump get his hands on an AB 🤪
