Print from Airliners.net discussion forum
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4997709/

Topic: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Eaa3
Posted 2010-11-30 14:07:07 and read 34462 times.

Flight Global claims:

Confirmed: A320 NEO to launch Wednesday, EIS targets 2016

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...onfirmed-a320-neo-to-launch-w.html

Given the aviation nature of this forum we should probably discuss this  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 14ccKemiskt
Posted 2010-11-30 14:21:27 and read 34364 times.

Given the supposed fuel saving of around 15%, the slow sales of the A320 this year and that Airbus has found the resources to develop the NEO, this should have been a no-brainer.

I'm a bit concerned that they maybe will be straining their resources here, given how much still is to be done on the other three (!) programs. I hope Boeing keeps their heads calm and awaits the response to this before diving into some over-enthusiastic project of their own.

//14cc

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Eaa3
Posted 2010-11-30 15:15:26 and read 34070 times.

I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: kl911
Posted 2010-11-30 15:15:44 and read 34071 times.

Quoting 14ccKemiskt (Reply 1):
given how much still is to be done on the other three (!) programs.

What three programs? Im aware of the A350 only at the moment. The military A400 is more EADS then Airbus IMO.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: AirNZ
Posted 2010-11-30 15:24:12 and read 33995 times.

Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

It's a completely different situation from your reference to the A3350/A350XWB

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 14ccKemiskt
Posted 2010-11-30 17:10:37 and read 33731 times.

Quoting kl911 (Reply 3):
What three programs? Im aware of the A350 only at the moment. The military A400 is more EADS then Airbus IMO.

Well, I was suggesting that the A380 program still eats quite a bit of developing resources. And that the people working on the A400M probably could be moved within Airbus if needed.

Then on the other hand, maybe the most efficient way of developing new aircraft is to do it in semi-parallell programs in order to keep up the competence and to gain economy of scale.

But i do welcome the NEO and I hope they'll get it right and on time.

//14cc

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2010-11-30 17:12:32 and read 33718 times.

Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

They won't have a choice. They can, of course, buy 737's with the old engines, or wait for Boeing to build its replacement (which this announcement will likely trigger.) Airbus simply does not have the resources to design a completely new plane at this point.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aesma
Posted 2010-11-30 17:28:20 and read 33633 times.

Just when Boeing is struggling, let's turn the knife in the wound ?

Or it may be an opportunity for B to launch the "797" to blow some smoke over the 787.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-11-30 17:35:42 and read 33591 times.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 7):

With at least 5 years before EIS, Boeing has a bit of breathing room. They can wait until they get the 787 sorted out.

Five years should be enough...right...?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: comorin
Posted 2010-11-30 17:51:23 and read 33498 times.

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 4):
Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

It's a completely different situation from your reference to the A3350/A350XWB

Much appreciated if you could elaborate - thanks. Would some airlines not balk at spending on an ageing fuselage and wing design?

It would be nice to see new cabins in this 'workhorse' market segment. Any improvements in engine design accrue to the airline and not to pax comfort.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-11-30 18:31:38 and read 33321 times.

Even if the majority of Boeing and Airbus customers wanted a brand new narrowbody family, Boeing and Airbus can't deliver it. Airbus is trying to get the A350 into production and Boeing is trying to get the 787 into service and neither has the resources to launch a new airplane program right now, so mild updates is what customers are going to have to settle for since there is no real competition through the end of the decade, at which point both OEMs will be able to launch new aircraft programs.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: SR4ever
Posted 2010-11-30 18:43:24 and read 33263 times.

With hindsight, one can expect the coming decade to be a very busy one for Airbus...

Till 2012/2013: design & production improvements for the 380-800

2013: EIS 350-900

2013/2014: EIS 330-300 Extra HGW?

2015: EIS 350-800

2015/2016: EIS 350-1000?

2016: EIS 380-900?

2016: EIS 319/320/321 (322?) NEO

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-11-30 19:32:06 and read 33087 times.

Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

Airlines tend to be conservative. They don't jump readily on all new designs that often. A320NEO will be easier to ramp up sales.

Quoting 14ccKemiskt (Reply 1):
I'm a bit concerned that they maybe will be straining their resources here

Hey, there is a recession out there with many engineers and technicians looking for work. Plus EADS is not really concerned these days on the next quarterly earnings.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 7):
Or it may be an opportunity for B to launch the "797" to blow some smoke over the 787.

Boeing will take it easy and not react that fast. They will continue with the script by saying that they are looking at re-engining and all new design options.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: KFlyer
Posted 2010-11-30 21:22:49 and read 32820 times.

IMHO, I do not expect Boeing to announce anything before year end - and expect a 797 EIS in 2018 or later.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aloha717200
Posted 2010-11-30 21:32:10 and read 32788 times.

May possibly be better for Boeing this way, give them time to evaluate the 320NEO and come up with something even better.


...and then have it enter service 10 years late.   

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: frmrCapCadet
Posted 2010-11-30 22:18:03 and read 32613 times.

Airbus is going to need a delta of a lot less than $7-8 million to sell an updated 320. And Boeing can counter by saving several billion and just drop their prices a million or two which will make for an even more extravigant delta.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: sirtoby
Posted 2010-11-30 22:25:07 and read 32586 times.

Press release is out on the Airbus website!
EIS confirmed for Spring 2016!

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: flyingAY
Posted 2010-11-30 22:35:20 and read 32554 times.

Quoting sirtoby (Reply 16):
Press release is out on the Airbus website!

Here's a direct link to the Airbus press release:
http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre...ng-engine-options-for-a320-family/

As already speculated here, Airbus confirms the following:

* CFM LEAP-X or P&W PurePower PW1100G as engine options
* sharklets
* fuel savings up to 15% (compared to what?)
* NEO option offered for A319, A320 and A321
* 500 nm more range or 2t more payload

[Edited 2010-11-30 22:39:12]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: PanAm_DC10
Posted 2010-11-30 22:36:27 and read 32533 times.

Here is the announcement from Airbus.

Airbus offers new fuel saving engine options for A320 Family

Airbus has decided to offer for its best-selling A320 Family new fuel saving engines as an option. Airlines have the choice between CFM International’s LEAP-X engine and Pratt & Whitney’s PurePower PW1100G engine. Known as the A320neo, this new engine option also incorporates fuel-saving large wing tip devices called Sharklets. Airbus will start deliveries of the A320neo Family in spring 2016.

The A320neo will not only deliver significant fuel savings of up to 15 percent, which represents up to 3,600 tonnes of CO2 savings annually per A320neo. In addition, A320neo customers will benefit from a double-digit reduction in NOx emissions, reduced engine noise, lower operating costs and up to 500nm (950 km) more range or two tonnes more payload.


More at Airbus.com

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: francoflier
Posted 2010-11-30 23:05:46 and read 32368 times.

Quoting flyingAY (Reply 17):
* fuel savings up to 15% (compared to what?)

I'm guessing against the current CFM-56 powered version of the A32x family.

This is about what both engine manufacturers are offering in terms of gain savings against the current generation of narrowboy engines (commonly referred to as the CFM56...).
The engines are what will bring most of the fuel saving figure. Airframe rework will only add a handful of percentage points on the overall efficiency. This is why neither manufacturer wanted to dive head first into a clean sheet design so soon. The game changing engine technology is just not there yet to provide the 25%+ efficiency gain the airlines were claiming. But both the LEAP-X and GTF should provide a pretty good step up in the meantime.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: KFlyer
Posted 2010-11-30 23:19:14 and read 32309 times.

IMHO, this made the 797's prospects brighter.  
Boeing now has sufficient time to innovate a better clean sheet design.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 00:04:12 and read 32074 times.

I guess the only moderately surprizing news is 2016 iso 2014 or 2015..



I can imagine airlines are not entirely satisfied with that and will push Airbus (e.g. converting existing 2013 slots to the NEO etc.)

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: PM
Posted 2010-12-01 00:22:31 and read 31931 times.

Slightly off-topic, but notice how the 'A320' on the picture is now in the new Airbus typeface.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: r2rho
Posted 2010-12-01 00:23:10 and read 31924 times.

Major announcement indeed. This fixes the Airbus narrowbody strategy for the next 15 years or so. NEO in 2016 and all-new A30X around 2025-27. This also means that the GTF has convince Airbus (remember that all the NEO rumors started after they tested a GTF prototype on their A340-600 test a/c).

I'm surprised Airbus made the move first, but they probably had no choice. They have no resources to launch an all-new program (heck, I have my doubts that they can manage NEO), so it was NEO or nothing. This first move also puts Boeing into an akward position - although they are in a better position in terms of engineering design resources, a 737reengine may not be as competitive, and open-rotor may not be mature enough.

Quoting SR4ever (Reply 11):
Till 2012/2013: design & production improvements for the 380-800

2013: EIS 350-900

2013/2014: EIS 330-300 Extra HGW?

2015: EIS 350-800

2015/2016: EIS 350-1000?

2016: EIS 380-900?

2016: EIS 319/320/321 (322?) NEO

...and let's not forget A380 production is still not 100% sorted out (although those would be more production than engineering resources), and that A400M has significant development (and likely redesign) work ahead. All this is going to be tough to manage in parallel.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: thediplomat
Posted 2010-12-01 00:42:21 and read 31809 times.

Quoting comorin (Reply 9):
Would some airlines not balk at spending on an ageing fuselage and wing design?

How old is the 737 fuselage design?

Quoting KFlyer (Reply 20):
IMHO, this made the 797's prospects brighter.

Why is that?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: scouseflyer
Posted 2010-12-01 00:53:44 and read 32607 times.

Any new developments are good news, hopefully they'll give this bird a proper new name rather then A320neo (this isn't the matrix!) they should be called the A319-300, A320-300 and A321-300.

And looks it looks like the A318 is a goner too

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: astuteman
Posted 2010-12-01 01:21:05 and read 32454 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
I guess the only moderately surprizing news is 2016 iso 2014 or 2015..

Which I'm going to guess is primarily driven by the need to secure the engineering resources for the other programmes......

Quoting r2rho (Reply 23):
Major announcement indeed.

Although having said that, the capital cost delta might dent the size of the financial gain to the customer of the new engines to the extent that the current model, which its probably worth remembering can also have sharklets, might still appeal to some customers, dependent on their operating model.

I'd venture that the biggest benefit to the economics of this upgrade is the "up to 500Nm" movement on the range/payload curve. It will be a long time indeed before the likes of bombardier or COMAC have narrobodys that can match the range/payload capabilty of the A320NEO across the whole range.....

Quoting r2rho (Reply 23):
This first move also puts Boeing into an akward position - although they are in a better position in terms of engineering design resources, a 737reengine may not be as competitive, and open-rotor may not be mature enough.

I suspect with a couple of % SFC improvements in train, and keen pricing, the current 737NG could still be viable for both Boeing and customers based on lower acquisition cost and perhaps earlier availability as time goes by.

Rgds

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 01:40:36 and read 33024 times.

Ok, i stand corrected.

I really expected more updates against the original A32x-family.


I am not sure if a new engine alone should bring EIS to 2016 instead of 2015 as earlier stated.
The next step is the introduction of the sharklets in 2012.

I am really wondering how much fuel savings the A32xNEO provides against the A32x with sharklets only?

Now let us wait and see for launching customers.


My bet for the A321NEO is Lufthansa, as they were the first customer for the A321 and the first examples are 22 years old when the A321NEO will start its service.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 01:44:25 and read 33002 times.

Quoting r2rho (Reply 23):
This fixes the Airbus narrowbody strategy for the next 15 years or so.

That is what Airbus hopes. I think it is a best guess with some hope behind it.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 26):
Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
I guess the only moderately surprizing news is 2016 iso 2014 or 2015..

Which I'm going to guess is primarily driven by the need to secure the engineering resources for the other programmes....

I think Airbus announcements are driven by a desire to temper growth their engineering workforce, delivering the existing 2000 aircraft backlog and milking the A320 as efficient as possible.

Then there is the airlines, that in the end pay all the salaries mortages, dinner parties, R&D and facilities at Airbus. I have the impression they have slightly different ideas.

EIS asap, why not 2014?, 15% better fuel consumption, why not 17%? What about additional capacity? 200 seats single class would be the perfect A320 replacement. Lower maintenance costs, what does it take to bring it down 20%? An improved wing seems necessary (said Air France-KLM) for better performance. Some parts of the A320 are 25 yrs old and need a serious update, don't they?

"Specification creep" is definitely on the table as far as the airlines are concerned. And they sit on the money. If the fleet managers of LH and UA or Delta - AF jointly visit Toulouse they keep the door open.

I see this announcement as a first step towards specifying the NEO. Leahy fired the first shots, but probably has no launch customer for a reason..

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CYatUK
Posted 2010-12-01 01:45:07 and read 32950 times.

Quoting scouseflyer (Reply 25):
And looks it looks like the A318 is a goner too



Could we say the same about IAE?

Obviously there are still a few years of production ahead but ultimately with the arrival of A32X NEO in 2016 and the gradual withdrawal of MD aircraft, IAE will have to concentrate on upgrade/maintenance of current enginers rather manufacturing of new ones.

Am I making a wrong assumption?

Sad to see such a successful "manufacturer" go (inverted commas since IAE is a joint venture)

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: rheinwaldner
Posted 2010-12-01 01:45:43 and read 32982 times.

Some points:

- The quite late EIS is IMO a concession to the constrained resource situation. It has built in much more reserves than once anticipated development in 2 to 2.5 years: http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...ratt-whitney-gtf-flight-testi.html

- Bad day for the C-Series.

- Remarkable how many posters here did not "see" that coming. But the signs were evident and consistent all the time (including the 15% figure).

- Airbus aims to be second with a new clean sheet design.

- The A320-NEO does not rule out that Airbus could bring a new clean sheet NB quite soon. That means that even if Boeing quickly commits to a new design Airbus could follow them after a quite short timespan (less than 5 years). To be second makes it much easier to choose the most effective strategy, the competitor is quantifiable and maybe even ground breaking new technologies can be incorporated that the first runner missed.

- The A320 will extend its live for many years.

- The NEO will end the run of the most successful jet airliner of all times (the A320 is the most sold single version of an civil jet aircraft).

- What will Boeing do: either do nothing and loose the 737 market to a significant extent - OR - do something

- If Boeing starts loosing sales quickly they may be "forced" to bring a 737-NEO as well. This would not be their prefered response (because anything they studied so far clearly is sub-par to the 15% expectation from Airbus, read my episode story here, post #236: Flightglobal: New A320NEO Information (by AustrianZRH Nov 18 2010 in Civil Aviation))

- If Boeing decides to bring a new NB there will be some years of undisputed A320 market leadership. Also a new NB would have to strive for any possible technological improvement. Otherwise no significant gains could be realized. But the all-high-tech-at-once approach miserably hurted the 787 program already. Does Boeing want to repeat an equally risky venture?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: astuteman
Posted 2010-12-01 02:02:25 and read 32837 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 28):
I think Airbus announcements are driven by a desire to temper growth their engineering workforce, delivering the existing 2000 aircraft backlog and milking the A320 as efficient as possible.

I think you're right that the EIS date also aims to protect the current backlog, and mitigate the impact to current A32X residuals

Rgds

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 02:04:39 and read 32872 times.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 30):
- Bad day for the C-Series.

No, a good day.

The A318 will not be offered as NEO and so both could be operated side-by-side by the same airlines with the new PW-engines.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: frigatebird
Posted 2010-12-01 02:13:14 and read 32765 times.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 26):

Quoting keesje (Reply 21):
I guess the only moderately surprizing news is 2016 iso 2014 or 2015..

Which I'm going to guess is primarily driven by the need to secure the engineering resources for the other programmes......

And the availability of the new engines themselves...

Quoting 328JET (Reply 27):
Now let us wait and see for launching customers.


My bet for the A321NEO is Lufthansa, as they were the first customer for the A321 and the first examples are 22 years old when the A321NEO will start its service.

The first model to have the NEO option is the A320, the A321 will follow later.
Pretty sure the earliest A320 customers will be launch customers for the NEO as well. They have hardly any other choice, they won't replace A320's with A320OEO's, right? (Although AF has been doing that already, but I expect them to order NEO's soon).

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: aerokiwi
Posted 2010-12-01 02:18:36 and read 32745 times.

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 4):
It's a completely different situation from your reference to the A3350/A350XWB

Because...? Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but without a bit of meat on the bones your statement is fairly dismissive and a bit hollow.

Quoting PM (Reply 22):
ightly off-topic, but notice how the 'A320' on the picture is now in the new Airbus typeface.

Yeah I noticed that - a shame. Why aircraft companies think anyone cares about their logos is beyond me, but I suppose it keeps a few hundred marketing folk employed  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: art
Posted 2010-12-01 02:22:27 and read 32647 times.

The 15% fuel saving:

- is that overall (mix of sector lengths) or a best case scenario (compared to what the A320 burns on its longest sector)

- when sharklets appear on the A320, the NEO advantage will be reduced

It wil be interesting to see how many existing A320 orders are converted to NEO. I f you need new aircraft 2013/14/15, could you postpone their arrival by several years?

On the production side, any risk of NEO builds slowing the line down so that overall NB production reduces for some time?

[Edited 2010-12-01 02:46:38]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: KFlyer
Posted 2010-12-01 02:33:39 and read 32576 times.

The late EIS is mainly due to the LEAP-X's late EIS. I too believe that the C Series will not get a considerable threat from A320neo. A319neo will still have at the least about a 8% increase in costs compared to C Series.
thediplomat, the reason could be found at an article on my blog, linking to which will be a violation of forum rules.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-01 02:36:47 and read 32521 times.

2016 is a good EIS IMHO.It is the year that Cfm are contracturally obliged to have the production engines coming off the line for the 919 (even if the plane is delayed).So they "know" they will have at least one engine ready.They will also know absolutly all the charistics (inc weight/thrust/Fuel burn) of the engine.They are spending the next 2/3 years looking at the changes required for the blended winglets.They can now incorporate (on computer) any further likley structural mod's required.

This 320 varient will (for once) be on time I feel sure of that. Sort of surprised the did not make the 321 the lead aircraft after all that talk in their business Pdf that was posted on A Net yesterday about the replacement market for 700 757's.

Think they have gone for the simple option BTW.There was earlier talk of new materials (Glare/AlLi?) being incorporated.No mention of this in the press release.

On paper 9 years (to all new plane-2025- according to their own paper) is not a long period.But not of course if the new plane is launched centered around the 319 size which I suspect it will be.If this is the case then the 2 planes will run along side each other for quite a while.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: frigatebird
Posted 2010-12-01 02:43:59 and read 32531 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 28):
Specification creep" is definitely on the table as far as the airlines are concerned. And they sit on the money. If the fleet managers of LH and UA or Delta - AF jointly visit Toulouse they keep the door open.

According to Airbus "The A320neo will have over 95 percent airframe commonality with the standard A320 Family"
So there is just 5% those fleet managers can play with... It's more a matter of take it or leave it IMHO. In this case, not such a bad decision by Airbus. Don't forget the current engines will remain available for the A320 family side by side with the NEO. You don't want too many differences in the airframes themselves then.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 02:50:54 and read 32639 times.

A few months ago Air France said they need an extra effort to to improve the A320 NEO.

- 10% to 14% better direct exploitation costs,
- wing improvements,
- weight reductions and
- drag reduction.
- EIS 2015/16.

Some of their 140 A320s are old (eighties) and the CSeries probably looks good as a replacement for the 60 A318/19s. No doubt Leahy has an invitation in his mailbox already inviting him for a consultation.

.
A320 NEO (with Pratt GTF's)

[Edited 2010-12-01 03:01:51]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 03:03:56 and read 32365 times.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 33):

The first model to have the NEO option is the A320, the A321 will follow later.

I know that the first model will be the A320, which makes sense as it is the oldest version.

But spring 2016 for the A320NEO, could mean late 2016 for the A321NEO.


I really hope Airbus is renaming the NEOs into A319-800, A320-800 and A321-800.

The 8 brings the required distance to current -100 on the A318/319 and -200 on the A320/321.
Also the 8 seems to be a very important number of todays aircraft programs.

And i still hope for a short range, higher capacity A322NEO with the same take-offweight as the A321NEO.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: frigatebird
Posted 2010-12-01 03:11:56 and read 32291 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 39):
A few months ago Air France said they need an extra effort to to improve the A320 NEO.

- 10% to 14% better direct exploitation costs,
- wing improvements,
- weight reductions and
- drag reduction.
- EIS 2015/16.

Some of their 140 A320s are old (eighties) and the CSeries probably looks good as a replacement for the 60 A318/19s

AF will have te settle with the A320NEO as offered. What choice will they have? The A319's and A318's aren't that old yet, so I expect AF to wait until the C-series are in service with other airlines. If they decide to snub the A319NEO and order the CS300, it will be a major coup for Bombardier  Wow!

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 03:44:29 and read 31693 times.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 41):
AF will have te settle with the A320NEO as offered.

EIS 2016, when is the design freeze, late 2012 ? 2013?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: LPSHobby
Posted 2010-12-01 03:57:01 and read 31539 times.

will the A321 NEO have the same range of a 757 ( 7200km) ?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: XT6Wagon
Posted 2010-12-01 04:05:50 and read 31421 times.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 41):
AF will have te settle with the A320NEO as offered. What choice will they have?

If the NEO price is 7-8million higher like Airbus said it might be, they can very well just buy conventional A320 with sharklets until Boeing has something new and the A320NEO gets a round or two of improvements. The biggest argument against the NEO remains. The A320 of today is plenty good, and the NEO is extra cost and risk for marginal improvement.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-01 04:15:03 and read 31311 times.

"will the A321 NEO have the same range of a 757 ( 7200km) ?"

No not if straight math is applied to existing quotes ranges (plus max 15%).If as Keesje states there is a weight reduction programme then it would get closer.But there is at present no sign of the (No "re" mention of new alloys and the 95% commonality statement).Suggests that it will be as origonally stated ie a low cost development of "1 billion".

Leehy has already stated that a 2013 A321 will be able to do all US transcon routes unrestricted.That would (I imagine) be the most efficient and powerful powerplant- 2500 "select" with sharklets.However US Transcon is not the whole world of course. (but important none the less). However as previously discussed even the 321 NEO (as details released at present) would only be able to do a very limited number of TATL routes. (although the 320 probably could do enough it is probably not big enough.

For me the great unknown is the fast expanding Far Eastern narrowbody requirements particularly the Chinese who obviously do (919) see a big internal market for such a plane.The 320/321? EIS are identical to the 919 which of course may suffer slippage.Looking at the weight of their paper plane (and planes tend to get heavier not lighter over development) the NEO could be the perfevt plane for them.They may even build them??

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2010-12-01 04:51:09 and read 30629 times.

Quoting parapente (Reply 45):
No not if straight math is applied to existing quotes ranges (plus max 15%).If as Keesje states there is a weight reduction programme then it would get closer.But there is at present no sign of the (No "re" mention of new alloys and the 95% commonality statement).Suggests that it will be as origonally stated ie a low cost development of "1 billion".

If Airbus can increase the MTOW of the 321NEO while the are at it, of lets say 3000kg, they have a very capable aircraft.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2010-12-01 05:13:25 and read 30192 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 47):
If Airbus can increase the MTOW of the 321NEO while the are at it, of lets say 3000kg, they have a very capable aircraft.

I think it's fair to say they already have a very capable aircraft, and that the NEO will make it a very, very capable aircraft indeed. Not quite able to match a 757 across the pond, true, but then again the market for that is fairly small. The A321NEO will certainly be able to do US transcons in both directions, all year round, at MZFW. It will also be able to do nice things like LHR-DXB, HKG-BOM, IAH-LIM and LOS-BRU at MZFW. With a payload reduction (or in an all-premium configuration) LHR-JFK might yet be possible.

However, a MTOW increase of 3 tons needs to be clarified further. Are we talking about fuel, payload or both? If payload, then you'd need to look at beefing up the wing structure to cater for the increased bending moment, as well as beefing up the MLG, and that'll add weight. If we're talking fuel only, you may "only" have to look at beefing up the MLG structure.

Finally, a MTOW increase of 3 tons would more than likely require a bit more oomph from the donks, and I'm not sure how much thrust will be available from either of the NEO options while maintaining the 15% fuel burn reduction.

In any case, Airbus have stated they want to avoid specification creep, so I don't think it's going to happen this time round.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: PanAm_DC10
Posted 2010-12-01 05:16:09 and read 30110 times.

Flightglobal, referencing ATI, have a report in which they quote Mr Leahy on who Airbus see as initial customers for the A320neo even though they have "no orders in hand right now". There are also some interesting comments as to why they don't require a launch customer at the moment.

talks are taking place with Lufthansa, AirAsia, Qatar Airways, International Lease Finance Corporation (ILFC), GECAS and IndiGo, all of whom are "very interested"

More at source

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-01 05:27:00 and read 29921 times.

Reply 47.
If Airbus can increase the MTOW of the 321NEO while the are at it, of lets say 3000kg, they have a very capable aircraft.

Interesting point.One limitation must I guess be pavement loading at some airports.

Another being that the new engines and structure are heavier not lighter.

But.From the outset of the A320 programme Airbus has always stated that an A322 was a possible option.Indeed there are a few on this forum that suggest they build it for the NEO series (short/med range 240 seater econ). The point being that if an A322 has always been possible then there must be some room left in the MTOW as suggested above. Hmmm

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 05:28:24 and read 29933 times.

"Boeing Keeps Options Open On New Engines, Aircraft"

http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20101201-705332.html>

"He said the 737 is significantly more fuel efficient than the A320, and Airbus' re-engining decision "is driven by the need to catch up with the 737's superior performance.".

I've seen this marketing slogan surface during the last few days. Does anyone have a graph of the last 10 yrs, sales and or deliveries ? I know the 737 "superior performance" is not widely supported. In fact I've heard it only from Boeing and its supporters..

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: SR4ever
Posted 2010-12-01 05:36:35 and read 29661 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 27):
My bet for the A321NEO is Lufthansa, as they were the first customer for the A321 and the first examples are 22 years old when the A321NEO will start its service.
IB and AZ are likely to comme soon after LH. LX 321s are also pretty old now (they were ordered by SR 20yrs ago).

Quoting keesje (Reply 28):
200 seats single class would be the perfect A320 replacement. Lower maintenance costs, what does it take to bring it down 20%?

Wasn't Airbus eyeing a A322 20 yrs ago?

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 30):
- Bad day for the C-Series.

Yes and no. 319-NEO might disqualify C30 in quite many cases, but C10 will enjoy a better position as 318 is no longer offered.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 41):
If they decide to snub the A319NEO and order the CS300, it will be a major coup for Bombardier

That remains to be seen. AF seems to prefer commonality benefits on its European fleet.

Quoting LPSHobby (Reply 43):
will the A321 NEO have the same range of a 757 ( 7200km) ?

It would be very good indeed, meaning more flights between Europe and the Middle East, Central Africa, Central Asia, with at least 1 middle-tier airport (if not both of them) in each OD.

[Edited 2010-12-01 05:50:24]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 05:53:11 and read 29239 times.

Quoting SR4ever (Reply 52):
Quoting keesje (Reply 28):
200 seats single class would be the perfect A320 replacement. Lower maintenance costs, what does it take to bring it down 20%?

Didn't Airbus eye a A322 20 yrs ago?

I think a 200 seater (single class) is the missing link.. The A321 is much bigger then the A320 (up to 220 seats)

Quoting parapente (Reply 50):
Interesting point.One limitation must I guess be pavement loading at some airports.

There's an off the shelve solution for that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGPJb3UE_DU I did a A322 NEO sketch a few weeks ago. (with beefed up wings); http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...sje_pics/AirbusA322NEOconcept2.jpg

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: B777LRF
Posted 2010-12-01 05:58:09 and read 28985 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 51):
I know the 737 "superior performance" is not widely supported. In fact I've heard it only from Boeing and its supporters.

It is indeed marketing spin.

Someone on this site posted fuel burn figures at MZFW for the A320 (IAE and CFM) and the B738. If memory serves me right, the Boeing burns very little less than the Airbus on shorter stages, with the picture reversing for longer stages. Or it was the other way around (Airbus burning very lttle less on short flights, Boeing very little less on longer). In either case, the difference was very much neglible, to the point of being almost academic.

Still, for a marketing person there's plenty of scope to claim this, that or the other. But as usual, anything coming from a marketing person should be taken with a very large dose of salt; if Airbus can reduce fuelburn by 15% that might translate to it burning 15.1% less than a 738 on some stages or 14.9% less on others. In either case, the Boeing is looking rather poorly in comparison.

Ring Ring
"Hello, John Leahy speaking"
"Hi John, it's Mike from Ryanair"
dut dut dut

Ring Ring
"Hello, John Leahy speaking"
"Hi John, it's Herb from Southwest"
"Herb, me old mucker, how's it hanging?"
"Not good John, not good. Can you sign me up for a couple hundred of those NEO thingies?"

[Edited 2010-12-01 06:00:18]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2010-12-01 06:06:41 and read 28786 times.

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 49):
However, a MTOW increase of 3 tons needs to be clarified further. Are we talking about fuel, payload or both? If payload, then you'd need to look at beefing up the wing structure to cater for the increased bending moment, as well as beefing up the MLG, and that'll add weight. If we're talking fuel only, you may "only" have to look at beefing up the MLG structure.



I would think that upping the ZFW would prove more valuable since the NEO will burn less fuel anyway. And if you still need more range, belly tanks would be attractive option for nice operators

Quoting keesje (Reply 51):
Interesting point.One limitation must I guess be pavement loading at some airports.



I am not sure, but that could be overcome with slightly larger tyres, if they can be accommodated. Another limiting factor is the wing . I am not familiar with 321 as it is, but if the Vref at MLW is not higher than 150kt then there is some room to increase the MLW without increase the wing aerea

The Thrust could be a problem. Currently the highest thrust option is 33k but according to CFM their new engine could be good up to 40k.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Burkhard
Posted 2010-12-01 06:30:10 and read 28359 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 12):
Hey, there is a recession out there with many engineers and technicians looking for work. Plus EADS is not really concerned these days on the next quarterly earnings.

Not here were the A320s are built - our economy has the biggest growth rate since the unification boom. 3.7% growth official now and this even conservative. Engineers and technicians can choose between many job offers.

Not surprising, we expected this already long ago. Together with a safe time reserve - remember the engines don't operate yet, and new engines can bear surprises...

Still I doubt an all new design is needed as early as 2025 - next logical step would be to replace the gear box with a carbon one in 2020 - that aircraft would be hard to be trashed by anything that isn't a paper plane of plain foam. Don't forget that there is no other ailiner in service that has as big composite fraction as the A320.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JerseyFlyer
Posted 2010-12-01 06:42:37 and read 28081 times.

Quoting francoflier (Reply 19):
Quoting flyingAY (Reply 17):
* fuel savings up to 15% (compared to what?)

I'm guessing against the current CFM-56 powered version of the A32x family.

Yes but with or without sharklets?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: scouseflyer
Posted 2010-12-01 06:45:53 and read 28047 times.

Quoting Burkhard (Reply 56):
Don't forget that there is no other ailiner in service that has as big composite fraction as the A320.

I didn't realise that, I thought that that crown was curerntly held by the A380 (and will evntually be snatched by the B787)

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aesma
Posted 2010-12-01 06:52:16 and read 27877 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 8):
With at least 5 years before EIS, Boeing has a bit of breathing room. They can wait until they get the 787 sorted out.

Five years should be enough...right...?

Breathing room ? With what will they compete in 2016, if they just launch an all new plane then ? On the contrary they have no breathing room at all with that announcement, they must answer quickly.

Quoting comorin (Reply 9):
It would be nice to see new cabins in this 'workhorse' market segment. Any improvements in engine design accrue to the airline and not to pax comfort.

Well, the 737 has a new cabin now, and the A320 had one a few years ago (that can even be retrofitted on older planes, unlike the Boeing one).

I don't think there is a way to improve comfort level much. If you really need comfort, there is business/first class.

Besides, airlines need to make money, if they don't then you don't fly. An improvement in cost may allow both the airline to make a little bit more money, and to reduce fares for the customer.

Quoting scouseflyer (Reply 25):
And looks it looks like the A318 is a goner too

Well, if you order one Airbus will make it, but you can't expect them to re-engine it. Remember that the A318 has its own engine (part of why it doesn't sell that well).

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: columba
Posted 2010-12-01 06:55:10 and read 27865 times.

My bet on the launch customer is Jetblue, they were the first who demanded more range from the A320 and were the first who tested an A320 with winglets. Also they have one of the largest (or even the largest) fleet of A320s in the world.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 40):
I really hope Airbus is renaming the NEOs into A319-800, A320-800 and A321-800.

I guess so, it will show family resemblance with the A380 and A350 family.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CFBFrame
Posted 2010-12-01 06:55:22 and read 27857 times.

Quoting parapente (Reply 37):
On paper 9 years (to all new plane-2025- according to their own paper) is not a long period.But not of course if the new plane is launched centered around the 319 size which I suspect it will be.If this is the case then the 2 planes will run along side each other for quite a while.


This is most interesting because the current Airbus plan ends up increasing product complexity, so they will have to deal with Classic customers, NEO customers, sharklet customers, and a new design. Added to that EIS of the 320,321, 319, and they did add that the 318 was not completely out the door?

Quoting parapente (Reply 45):
as Keesje states there is a weight reduction programme then it would get closer


Flightglobal says there will be a weight increase. At the beginning of the article Airbus said that a weight savings would be seen, while Flightglobal said a weight increase. I would guess some of the weight increase will be offset by material changes to the interior and some other natural changes?

Another interesting point from the Flightglobal story is that Airbus does not believe the existing backlog will shift to NEO. Found that strange because I would have assumed the objective to be for a complete shift from classics to NEOs. There is a new program, we're very excited about the new program, we have no launch customer, it enters service when much newer a/c are coming on line as well, we don't expect current customers to switch, but we know this is the right thing to do? Are we having fun yet?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-01 07:17:18 and read 27454 times.

HELP PLEASE!

"However, he points out that "at some point in time" it will make more sense for customers to order the Neo because of the weight savings the new engines offer on the new airframe over models powered by International Aero Engines V2500s.

Excluding engines, nacelles and pylons, the airframe for the A320neo will be 250-300kg (550-660lb) heavier than the current A320 airframe".

If the new engines are lighter than the old ones as stated in Flight by "The mouth" of airbus himself. see above copy/paste from Flight. Why oh why does the wing need beefing up? I have obviously missed something obvious for which I appologise in advance - but cannot see it.

But if for whatever reason I can't see the above is true he still seems to be saying that there is a weight saving on the engines alone.- is that your'e understanding?

If true this plane is going to have some performance as an increase in MTOW (thus range) would be well possible

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: WildcatYXU
Posted 2010-12-01 07:24:43 and read 27301 times.

Quoting parapente (Reply 62):
Why oh why does the wing need beefing up?

I'd guess ... sharklets?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2010-12-01 07:29:24 and read 27237 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 27):
Now let us wait and see for launching customers.

Granted, not a big customer, but I would be somewhat shocked if TP didn't order these. The extra 500nm would allow TP to fly the right sized plane to the far reaches of Eastern Europe, to the middle East and some African destinations where the A358 will be too big of a plane. The A321neo will be the A310 replacement many airlines including TP, never had.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 07:44:00 and read 27050 times.

I can't believe it will take Airbus five years to adapt the LEAP-X and PW1100G to the A320 platform.

I'm guessing the real reason for the 2016 EIS is that CFM and Pratt won't have engines ready before 2015 (I mean the PW1100G is still a CAD design, is it not?).

As for Boeing, they're padding the 737's backlog quite nicely at the moment. I cannot see the "797" being ready before the end of the decade, so I am inclined to think that Boeing will announce their own 737neo program in 2011 with a similar EIS to the A320neo.

Then both companies will launch new narrowbody families with an EIS in the early 2020s.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Eaa3
Posted 2010-12-01 07:46:48 and read 26918 times.

I think that they are going to have to do more than just upgrade the engines. I think that they can't develop a plane with the ultimate plan of making a totally new A320 replacement maybe 10 years later. It would make the A320 NEO a bad investment and a new B737 replacement a good investment in comparison. So I think they will have to eat their words and develop a totally new plane, even if efficiency wise they could't make it much more efficient than a A320 NEO. Obviously the A350 is taking up a lot of their engineering talent but it will wrap up soon and then Airbus's engineers can focus solely on the A320 replacement.

Boeing on the other hand has a difficult decision to make. The A350 will probably kill the B777 and the A320 NEO (or a totally new aircraft) will kill the B737 and Boeing needs to develop 2 new planes to replace the 777 and 737. But I doubt they could start 2 new programs from scratch. So they will have to choose which market is more important to them. I bet the 737 is more important to them and they would prioritize that at the cost of the 777 market. Which will make the A350 a success and the B737/A320 market will remain split as it is today.

That is my prediction. Only time will tell.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11886159

Quoting Stitch (Reply 65):
I can't believe it will take Airbus five years to adapt the LEAP-X and PW1100G to the A320 platform.

I'm guessing the real reason for the 2016 EIS is that CFM and Pratt won't have engines ready before 2015 (I mean the PW1100G is still a CAD design, is it not?).

As for Boeing, they're padding the 737's backlog quite nicely at the moment. I cannot see the "797" being ready before the end of the decade, so I am inclined to think that Boeing will announce their own 737neo program in 2011 with a similar EIS to the A320neo.

Then both companies will launch new narrowbody families with an EIS in the early 2020s.

I would guess that they are planning to do a lot more than put new engines on the A320. Maybe they just don't want to trigger a response from Boeing yet.

[Edited 2010-12-01 07:51:14]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: SR4ever
Posted 2010-12-01 07:50:41 and read 26831 times.

Quoting WildcatYXU (Reply 63):
The A321neo will be the A310 replacement many airlines including TP, never had.

Yes, to a pretty large extend.

Now the issue is whether such frame will efficiently feature a 3 if not a 4-class seating layout...

321-800 (?) could be an interesting way of upgauging 319 Dedicate of AF, although it may not work on all current Dedicate lines.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CFBFrame
Posted 2010-12-01 07:59:02 and read 26685 times.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 59):
(that can even be retrofitted on older planes, unlike the Boeing one).

Can you share a source on this? I'm more interested in reading more about this.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 54):
if Airbus can reduce fuelburn by 15% that might translate to it burning 15.1% less than a 738 on some stages or 14.9% less on others. In either case, the Boeing is looking rather poorly in comparison.

I'm not sure this 15% number is related to anything currently. Think Airbus needs to stick those engines on a 320 to define a real performance improvement number. Not sure it will be very different from the Boeing number in the end. What the performance number ends up being will drive Boeing's decision, not the marketing pitches.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Eaa3
Posted 2010-12-01 08:01:41 and read 26666 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 64):

Granted, not a big customer, but I would be somewhat shocked if TP didn't order these

I would not be suprised if Icelandair ordered these planes. Having a family of aircraft, A319,A320 and A321, that could all be deployed to Europe and North America would mean that they could open up a lot more (smaller) destinations without sacrificing the efficency of having the same planes flying to both North America and European routes(on a 24 hour cycle). An Icelandair aircraft that can operate for example KEF-CHP-KEF-JFK-KEF (A320NEO) within 24 hours (as is done today with B757's) will fly up to 17 hours a day. While an aircraft that can only fly Eurpean routes (A320's today) will only fly about 10-12 hours a day. So the extra range would be game changing for them.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 08:10:23 and read 26620 times.



Leahy (Airbus): : “It was a no brainer, we know the business case is excellent.”



Coupron (ILFC) : “If indeed the Airbus product offering offers a 15 percent more fuel efficient aircraft, then Boeing has to respond,”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-1...sure-on-boeing-to-upgrade-737.html

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 08:16:21 and read 26529 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 70):
Coupron (ILFC) : “If indeed the Airbus product offering offers a 15 percent more fuel efficient aircraft, then Boeing has to respond,”

Considering how strongly the 737 has been selling this year, one wonders if the A320neo was Airbus' response?   

If the 737 can continue to sell 400-500 frames a year for the next five years until the A320neo enters service, the production line will be full through the end of the decade, which would allow Boeing to skip the 737neo and go direct to the "797" next decade when the technologies and processes will have matured sufficiently.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: WildcatYXU
Posted 2010-12-01 08:21:11 and read 26411 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 65):
Pratt won't have engines ready before 2015 (I mean the PW1100G is still a CAD design, is it not?).

Now that's an interesting remark. New engine design from PW, new aircraft from Airbus utilizing it. Why does it sound familiar?   

(OK, I know that it was IAE, but still...)

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: ER757
Posted 2010-12-01 08:39:18 and read 26044 times.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 44):
the NEO is extra cost and risk for marginal improvement.

15% efficiency gain and 500 nm range improvement don't sound marginal to me.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: brendows
Posted 2010-12-01 08:46:32 and read 25928 times.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 54):
Or it was the other way around (Airbus burning very lttle less on short flights, Boeing very little less on longer).

Numbers I've seen supports this, that the 737NG has a lower fuel burn on longer legs compared to the A320. The margin isn't huge, but it's noticeable. On shorter legs it's the other way, with the A320 in the lead.

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 61):
Flightglobal says there will be a weight increase. At the beginning of the article Airbus said that a weight savings would be seen, while Flightglobal said a weight increase. I would guess some of the weight increase will be offset by material changes to the interior and some other natural changes?

The wing and wing box will need some modification and strengthening due to the higher loads from the sharklets, and the weight and load from the engines (which will be heavier). Other than that I'd guess that they would be able to shed of weight in other areas, which Airbus has talked about earlier.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: RoseFlyer
Posted 2010-12-01 09:00:58 and read 25587 times.

Great news from Airbus! I am a bit surprised to see them go for both LeapX and Geared TurboFan. I would have thought it would be one or the other since they are quite different engines.

I think the 2016 timeframe is based on engine availability. Hopefully both engine companies can keep to their schedules so that they won't have a large gap in one of the engine lines, which could cause manufacturing quite some trouble at the rate that the A320 is right now.

Any idea if they will phase in the new engine and continue to produce the old version alongside the new version like Boeing did when they went from the 737 classic to NG? There will likely have to be quite a few structural changes to support the new engines as they add over 1,000lbs to the airframe.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 09:06:51 and read 25498 times.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 30):
- Bad day for the C-Series.

The good news is that there is now more credibility for the Pratt Engine. The bad news is that Airbus are offering more range with a lower operating cost difference with the A319neo versus the CS300. Leahy made specific remarks today about the viability of the CSeries business case given the A319neo, A320neo, and A321neo go ahead.

Bombardier have a press conference tomorrow, we will see how they will spin this as I am sure they will be bombarded with questions.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 30):
Remarkable how many posters here did not "see" that coming. But the signs were evident and consistent all the time (including the 15% figure).

Going forward Airbus will release information in a timely manner and packets: launch customers, then more detailed specs, then more DOC savings, etc. etc. to maintain attention This will all be part of their marketing campaigns to distract customers from the CSeries and B737s.

[Edited 2010-12-01 09:07:45]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-01 09:29:02 and read 25084 times.

I feel certain (as others) that they already have a few orders in the bag.This is a major "New Gen" launch.They are going to milk it a far as possible.A new fact here a new fact there - with new orders in between. As Stitch has said the date gives them Leap-X certainty.Thus launch date certainty and a "total" response to the 919.

The comments on Bombardier and the shockwave (if true) that would hit P&W are interesting - no?

So we have a little MRJ hapily coming along - not getting any orders mind you - but coming along and avoiding the two big bad bears (and China and Russia,s new planes BTW).They have the Purepower engine - at 15 -17K lbs thrust.All well and good.Problem is the lack of orders (65 from only 2 customers and one of them is "forced").So tell me why does the Embraer continue to sell so well with it's ancient engine and older overstreatched frame? Something to do with engines??

But the Bombardier who not only encroached on A&B's territory, they further implied that they might "go for the throat". Hmmm and what has happened! The mouth of airbus on his NG launch states that there is now no case for their heavier shorter range,smaller "C" what so ever - and that's why nobody has been ordering it.Well his facts do stack up - nobody has been ordering it.

Why? Something to do with the engines?.No guarantees on their (engine) claims was the reason the latest order to back out gave as I recall. How many orders? 90? Nothing really. Could it be the engines.? Well their ones require 23Klbs thrust.
Now thats a load more than 15/17.Heavily revised core and a new fan - pretty much a new engine - no?

But Cfm's new one is in excess of 30k with the ability to go to around 40k.For P&W thats a whole (third) new purepower engine.
3 new engines for 150 orders???????????? With Leap-X alraedy on board.If - as they must - the first few orders go to Leap-X..... Whither Purepower?.. At any thrust level.







So for P&W thats a whole new engine. But hold on they have sold "none2 on the Mry,"none"

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-01 09:31:59 and read 25040 times.

Now things get interesting. When will the sales come? I really doubt that Airbus would have released the NEO for sale without some pretty solid reassurances from at least one buyer. Who will be first?

What will the other guys do? Boeing will probably NEO...they really don't have much of a choice unless they can really, really cut the prices on the 737...their only other option.

I don't think this significantly effects the CSeries. It will be at least 2017 until NEO EIS for the 319, and contrary to what Leahy says, I don't think it will be lighter or more efficient than the CS300. Since we don't have an OEW for the CS300, we'll have to wait and see. If the 319 and CS300 are competing head to head, without commonality being an issue, the CS still has advantages.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 59):
Breathing room ? With what will they compete in 2016, if they just launch an all new plane then ? On the contrary they have no breathing room at all with that announcement, they must answer quickly.

I reckon they have as much as a year to make up their minds while still making an EIS by 2016 likely. I think a large part of the reason that Airbus gives a 2016 EIS has more to do with engine availability than the airframe.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 10:00:55 and read 24456 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 78):
I don't think this significantly effects the CSeries. It will be at least 2017 until NEO EIS for the 319, and contrary to what Leahy says, I don't think it will be lighter or more efficient than the CS300. Since we don't have an OEW for the CS300, we'll have to wait and see. If the 319 and CS300 are competing head to head, without commonality being an issue, the CS still has advantages.

Who cares about OEW? At the end of the day, it is the cash operating costs and price of the airplanes. Airbus is narrowing the gap with the A319neo against the CS300, they are a 900 pound gorilla and can play on price and so many other factors. And you can not exclude commonality. Airbus will offer great commonality with A320/A320neo family that will also flow into the business case.
As Planemaker said previously, the Cseries production ramp up will be 50 at best. That probably won't kick in till 2015 at best. Airbus can meanwhile offer early trade-ins and all sorts of levers they can play with.

Make no mistake here. Airbus are equally going after Bombardier as they are after Boeing. There are at least two articles in Flight today where there is indication that they are making life difficult for the CSeries: (1) mention of the Cseries business case viability, (2) that there may be an A318neo. I can tell you with great certainty that there will never be an A318neo, but this is all part of the carefully controlled messages they are sending that the Cseries are in Airbus cross-hairs.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 10:01:48 and read 24546 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 78):
If the 319 and CS300 are competing head to head, without commonality being an issue, the CS still has advantages.

Agreed, it's simply leaner, lighter, less capable and more fuel efficient.

I hope Bombardier doesn't wait to long with the 150 seat 2 class CS500. It would have less range, no container option, less luggage room and 5-7% better efficiency then the A320. Then something hits the (geared) fan.

  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2010-12-01 10:09:15 and read 24325 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 76):
to maintain attention This will all be part of their marketing campaigns to distract customers from the CSeries and B737s.

Oh come on. Do you really thing that companies that invest billions in aircraft aquisition and fleet planning really get distracted that easily? It's maketing for self promotion, period.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 10:14:05 and read 24250 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 80):
Agreed, it's simply leaner, lighter, less capable and more fuel efficient.

So is a Cessna150 against the A319

Quoting keesje (Reply 80):
I hope Bombardier doesn't wait to long with the 150 seat 2 class CS500. It would have less range, no container option, less luggage room and 5-7% better efficiency then the A320. Then something hits the (geared) fan.

A 5-7% fuel efficient plane does not mean it has lower operating costs and revenue upside when ALL FACTORS are accounted for. A CS500 would get killed against the A320neo. If Bombardier would have made a clean sheet 6 abreast and focus on the real market of 150-200 seats, it would be a different story, and they can well compete against Airbus even if they too went with a clean sheet design as the market in this segment is HUGE compared to the 100-149 seat segment.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 10:23:51 and read 24099 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 81):
Oh come on. Do you really thing that companies that invest billions in aircraft aquisition and fleet planning really get distracted that easily? It's maketing for self promotion, period.

No they don't. What I meant is that Airbus will not disclose all the benefits with the neo option all at once. They will provide as much information as they have to the most interested customers to sign them up. But as a general effort, they will release specification, performance, cost, etc. information in parts going forward to make sure airlines that are not so convinced on the Cseries stay that way.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Centre
Posted 2010-12-01 10:25:16 and read 24076 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 76):
The bad news is that Airbus are offering more range with a lower operating cost difference with the A319neo versus the CS300. Leahy made specific remarks today about the viability of the CSeries business case given the A319neo, A320neo, and A321neo go ahead.

Airlines that bought or will be buying the Cseries can compliment their engine choice by adding the higher capacity A320 and A321, i.e LH and F9 so far.


on another note, is it too late for Bombardier to add the leap-x to the Cseries, are there any exclusivity clauses between Bombardier and P&W? or is technically costly to add the Leap-X?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-01 10:32:24 and read 23961 times.

Quoting parapente (Reply 77):
The mouth of airbus on his NG launch states that there is now no case for their heavier shorter range,smaller "C" what so ever - and that's why nobody has been ordering it.Well his facts do stack up - nobody has been ordering it.
Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 79):
Who cares about OEW? At the end of the day, it is the cash operating costs and price of the airplanes. Airbus is narrowing the gap with the A319neo against the CS300, they are a 900 pound gorilla and can play on price and so many other factors. And you can not exclude commonality. Airbus will offer great commonality with A320/A320neo family that will also flow into the business case.

OEW is one of the things that effects efficiency. Leahy specifically speaks of it when mentioning the CSeries. He says the 319 will be lighter. I don't think so, but I am not privy to the oew of the CSeries.

I didn't exclude commonality...in fact, I specifically included it in my assessment. Everybody knows the potential of fleet commonality on sales. I made my comparison where commonality isn't an issue.

I don't think BBD ever said they plan on stealing all of the market, but the market is huge and there is plenty of room for another player. Every since the P&W became available, everybody was aware of NEO options for the 320 and 737...and I imagine they planned accordingly before investing their time, resources and money.

Still, until it either sells or is canceled...we just won't know for sure, regardless of speculation or Leahy's comments.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 11:00:13 and read 23524 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 85):
Still, until it either sells or is canceled...we just won't know for sure, regardless of speculation or Leahy's comments.

  

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 85):
OEW is one of the things that effects efficiency. Leahy specifically speaks of it when mentioning the CSeries. He says the 319 will be lighter. I don't think so, but I am not privy to the oew of the CSeries.

Agreed. My only point is that specs like OEW drive out operating costs. And in the end that is what most matters.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 85):
I didn't exclude commonality...in fact, I specifically included it in my assessment. Everybody knows the potential of fleet commonality on sales. I made my comparison where commonality isn't an issue.

But how often is commonality a non-issue? The A320neo will not only have broad fleet commonality of 130 to 200 seats , but also 95% commonality with the existing A320 family.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 85):
I don't think BBD ever said they plan on stealing all of the market, but the market is huge and there is plenty of room for another player.

No manufacturer makes such claims. Their claim is about the size of the 100-149 seat market and they will gain a portion of it. My argument all along has been that their basis of the size of this market is on the premise that it is mostly a replacement of inefficient designs in that category can not be applied to the future given the simplicity an airline can achieve by serving the entire narrowbody segment with Embraer E-Jets and A320/neo or B737s. It is not 100% seamless in seat range coverage, but makes operations and the due cost savings attractive. The A320neo option just throws another monkey wrench in to the CSeries program business case.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 11:09:19 and read 23383 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 85):
OEW is one of the things that effects efficiency. Leahy specifically speaks of it when mentioning the CSeries. He says the 319 will be lighter. I don't think so, but I am not privy to the oew of the CSeries.

The last OEW Bombardier let slip for the CS100 was 33.3t. The A319 is closer to 41t.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-12-01 11:32:27 and read 22958 times.

Quoting scouseflyer (Reply 25):
And looks it looks like the A318 is a goner too
Quoting 328JET (Reply 32):
The A318 will not be offered as NEO and so both could be operated side-by-side by the same airlines with the new PW-engines.
Quoting SR4ever (Reply 52):
but C10 will enjoy a better position as 318 is no longer offered.
Quoting Aesma (Reply 59):
Well, if you order one Airbus will make it, but you can't expect them to re-engine it. Remember that the A318 has its own engine (part of why it doesn't sell that well).

Look again.....admittedly, it's also Leahy's job to confuse the competition.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...fer-neo-version-of-a318-leahy.html

Quote:
"Airbus may look at offering its new engine option on the A318 in the future, but has decided to focus on the A319, A320 and A321 for now because these models represent its 'core market'.

Speaking to ATI today, Airbus chief operating officer for customers John Leahy said the manufacturer 'at a later date may look at the A318', but the model has been left out at this stage to concentrate on its core products."


Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 79):
Make no mistake here. Airbus are equally going after Bombardier as they are after Boeing. There are at least two articles in Flight today where there is indication that they are making life difficult for the CSeries: (1) mention of the Cseries business case viability, (2) that there may be an A318neo. I can tell you with great certainty that there will never be an A318neo, but this is all part of the carefully controlled messages they are sending that the Cseries are in Airbus cross-hairs.

Precisely the purpose of the second article. Although of all the candidates, the A318 has the most obvious weight which can be shed to offset the increase due to NEO. So even if it has the least priority, can it definitely be said that Airbus is abandoning the 100-seat market?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: PanAm788
Posted 2010-12-01 11:48:17 and read 22647 times.

Interesting note: Boeing's stock has gone up 2.5% today, despite a 787 delay and an Airbus A320 NEO launch. Good for me since I'm a shareholder, but unexpected.

I'm very interested in what Boeing's response will be. It seems with the 787 debacle, they've put themselves in a bind. In 7 years, I see the market as this:

-The A380 dominates the 748. 748 has a lockdown on cargo and roughly the same passenger orders as the A340-600.
-The A350 has what the 777 has today: the large twin market. Boeing launches a 777NG and is able to retain about 35% of the market share.
- The 787-8/9 are going to be the next A330 and sell like hotcakes once they actually go into service. They will be effective "long and thin" airplanes, and be more effective then the shorter versions of the A350. However the A350 and newer A330s will have some market share.
- The A32x NEO will take over a very good portion of the 737's market share. I see Boeing skipping a 737NEO (because it will still be less fuel efficient than the A32xNEO so there's really no point) and instead coming out with a heavily, heavily modified NNG that will basically be a new aircraft or a 797. If they launch or begin development soon, I think the new aircraft route is the best one to take and they will once again dominate the large narrowbody sector.

If A350 is delayed (I think it will be personally) it will make way for a more popular 777NG. If this occurs and if Boeing is able to get enough cushion in the 737 line to launch a 797, I see the future pendulum swinging in Boeing's favor. If this doesn't happen, Boeing is forced to launch/waste resources on an inferior 737NEO and Airbus will be at an advantage with the new narrowbody, having more time and resources to allot. Plus, if the A350 is on time, the 777NG doesn't have too great of a chance, swinging the pendulum in Airbus' favor.

Also, can anyone else see Boeing partnering up with Bombardier to help them battle the A319NEO?

Thanks for reading!

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: odwyerpw
Posted 2010-12-01 12:02:16 and read 22351 times.

I'm surprised at how subdued the announcement was. This is a HUGE deal..... I thought they might announce interior options, etc... with the NEO.....but I guess it really is just a News Engine Option....and not a Next Generation Aircraft.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 12:09:52 and read 22232 times.

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 88):
can anyone else see Boeing partnering up with Bombardier to help them battle the A319NEO?

Partnering up on aircraft programs is not like airlines partnering on routes. Bombardier is too far down the line to even appeal to Boeing. Besides BBD tried a few years back with BA, and BA were not interested.

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 88):
oeing's stock has gone up 2.5% today, despite a 787 delay and an Airbus A320 NEO launch

The whole market is up today. Even Bombardier. The Dow is up over 200 points. It is general US and world positive economuc news.

[Edited 2010-12-01 12:10:41]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 12:12:12 and read 22174 times.

Quoting odwyerpw (Reply 89):
I'm surprised at how subdued the announcement was. This is a HUGE deal..... I thought they might announce interior options, etc... with the NEO.....but I guess it really is just a News Engine Option....and not a Next Generation Aircraft.

Patience my friend. Patience. All in good time.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: OryCdg
Posted 2010-12-01 12:29:03 and read 21961 times.

Anything wrong in this article (or in this picture) ?  

"An Air France A320 taking off from Toulouse Blagnac"

http://www.liberation.fr/economie/01...uveau-moteurs-pour-les-airbus-a320

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 13:01:15 and read 21389 times.

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 88):
Also, can anyone else see Boeing partnering up with Bombardier to help them battle the A319NEO?

To late to lead to a fruitfull partnership I guess. Embraer is sitting on the fence though and has expresssed ambitions to go beyond the E195.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CFBFrame
Posted 2010-12-01 13:03:42 and read 21373 times.

Hey, if he's talking so much about the CSeries he's doing it for one reason; airlines are comparing his offering to that a/c. He's trying to sign up customers before they have a good chance to really look at the data. Interesting the 737 is not where he's focused, because he's not won as big as he's usually done this year and his opportunties rest in getting the CSeries off his case. QR, LH have been playing in the CSeries sandbox. Maybe AF has thrown the program in his face as well.

Let's take a look at why he may be fighting the CSeries; UA/CO may be gone, DL could be gone, and that leaves him with the also rans in the US. Republic has gone to the CSeries. Boeing picks up the majors and holds its current volume players in Europe, holds its share in the Asia region, and remains in a comfortable market position. Airbus has the most to lose, it increases complexity, adds risks with two new engines that are not operational currently, and has placed its newer product square in the face of the new entrants (and not the 737).

Airbus needs to make a good case for NEO and it has to do it against programs that have not flown yet. Boeing has carved out a position that puts it in a safe place where its base has supported (legacies, and leasing companies). This is a very strange market that has awarded the incumbents very different positions.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 13:25:29 and read 20991 times.

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 94):
DL could be gone

Not according to Delta. http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/4216912/ I believe there is a lot of hope from folks assuming UA and Delta will have other criteria then value, price and availability.

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 94):
Boeing picks up the majors and holds its current volume players in Europe, holds its share in the Asia region, and remains in a comfortable market position.

The A321 already offers significantly larger payload over longer distances then the slow selling 737-900ER. Now it will have a capability boost. I think every TCON carrier in the US will have a look and find out there isn't that much competition in the NB field..

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: DEVILFISH
Posted 2010-12-01 13:40:59 and read 20725 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 93):
To late to lead to a fruitfull partnership I guess. Embraer is sitting on the fence though and has expresssed ambitions to go beyond the E195.

A partnership could begin on the southern flank.....

"Boeing proposes Embraer link in bid for Brazil contract"

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art...nk-in-bid-for-brazil-contract.html

Although Boeing's prospects in the F-X2 contest are nowhere clear, any collaboration could quickly spread over to the commercial side.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CFBFrame
Posted 2010-12-01 13:41:47 and read 20728 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 95):
The A321 already offers significantly larger payload over longer distances then the slow selling 737-900ER. Now it will have a capability boost. I think every TCON carrier in the US will have a look and find out there isn't that much competition in the NB field..

You may be right, but the current fight is not after the 321 it's a fight for 319/320s. Leahy is trying to defend his bread and butter.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CFBFrame
Posted 2010-12-01 13:48:18 and read 20583 times.

Quoting PanAm788 (Reply 88):
Thanks for reading!

You better sell your stock if you see things as outlined in your post!!!

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: davs5032
Posted 2010-12-01 14:20:00 and read 20106 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 77):
If the 319 and CS300 are competing head to head, without commonality being an issue, the CS still has advantages.

This is true. I think someone in this thread stated that the 319NEO would be lighter than the CS300. There is NO way that this is true. Smaller fuselage, more use of composites, etc.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 85):
But how often is commonality a non-issue? The A320neo will not only have broad fleet commonality of 130 to 200 seats , but also 95% commonality with the existing A320 family.

Commonality is still an issue, but this announcement makes it less of an issue IMO. Sure, commonality is important for fleets, but what about an airline that wants to start their mainline fleet @ 110 or 120 seats. There are a lot of airlines out there that have DC-9's/717's to replace, and Airbus has essentially abandoned this segment.

Airbus, by removing the 318 from the picture, gives Bombardier a more valid commonality argument to pitch to Airlines.
-Commonality between 130 and 200 seats is great, but if such commonality forces you to leave open a certain capacity range that you need for certain routes, it might not be worth it.

Some airlines who want planes in their mainline fleet with less capacity than Airbus offers might be more inclined to order the CS 100 and 300, as it gives them some commonality at the low end, while still meeting their 100-130 seat needs.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 14:26:11 and read 20077 times.

So, Airbus has provided the additional airframe weight (without engines, nacelles, pylons) for the NEO:


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...fer-neo-version-of-a318-leahy.html


250-300Kgs additional empty weight.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 14:28:07 and read 20041 times.

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 96):
A partnership could begin on the southern flank.....
Quoting keesje (Reply 93):
Embraer is sitting on the fence though and has expresssed ambitions to go beyond the E195.

Precisely. Whether they will form a partnership remains to be determined. But I m sure the two will sit together to explore this option.

Embraer brings many things to the table: makes good products, has cheaper labor costs, has a good customer base and supports them well, is in the military market, and can be an important partner and ally to help the Boeing Company as a whole to capitalize on several opportunities that can be packaged into the partnership deal in Brazil and beyond within the continent.

On the commercial aircraft side of opportunities, one option would be a true 2-class single aisle optimized platform for the 120 to 150 seat segment which Embraer can build, and 160 o 220 twin aisle trans-con built by Boeing with flight crew commonality between the two platforms at the very least.

[Edited 2010-12-01 14:32:34]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aesma
Posted 2010-12-01 14:34:05 and read 19995 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 77):
I reckon they have as much as a year to make up their minds while still making an EIS by 2016 likely. I think a large part of the reason that Airbus gives a 2016 EIS has more to do with engine availability than the airframe.

You're saying Boeing (or Airbus for that matter) can make an all new plane in 4 years ? Optimistic much ?

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 87):
Precisely the purpose of the second article. Although of all the candidates, the A318 has the most obvious weight which can be shed to offset the increase due to NEO. So even if it has the least priority, can it definitely be said that Airbus is abandoning the 100-seat market?

I'm not sure I follow. The A318 is already more advanced than its brethren, with tricks like laser welded lower fuselage. How would it shed more weight than the bigger planes in the family ?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 14:39:07 and read 19956 times.

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 99):
Commonality is still an issue, but this announcement makes it less of an issue IMO. Sure, commonality is important for fleets, but what about an airline that wants to start their mainline fleet @ 110 or 120 seats. There are a lot of airlines out there that have DC-9's/717's to replace, and Airbus has essentially abandoned this segment.

Bombardier will likely maintain that they will still have double digit direct operating costs savings with their CS300 against the A319neo. Airbus will come up with something different especially with the A320neo commonality. The truth will likely lie in the middle. Airbus will then deeply discount the A319neo, throw in spare parts, free training, and god knows what else that Bombardier will need to counter to. It will be a blood bath.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aesma
Posted 2010-12-01 14:45:31 and read 19912 times.

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 67):
Quoting Aesma (Reply 59):
(that can even be retrofitted on older planes, unlike the Boeing one).

Can you share a source on this? I'm more interested in reading more about this.

New cabin launched in 2007 : New A320 Cabin Interior Introduced On Niki (by Keesje Mar 23 2007 in Civil Aviation)

Condor first airline to retrofit it on its fleet : http://www.airbus.com/en/presscentre...hived/news-category/press_release/

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aesma
Posted 2010-12-01 14:47:16 and read 19874 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 103):
Bombardier will likely maintain that they will still have double digit direct operating costs savings with their CS300 against the A319neo. Airbus will come up with something different especially with the A320neo commonality. The truth will likely lie in the middle. Airbus will then deeply discount the A319neo, throw in spare parts, free training, and god knows what else that Bombardier will need to counter to. It will be a blood bath.

Or Airbus will just be able to deliver 10 times more planes per year.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: DocLightning
Posted 2010-12-01 14:48:05 and read 19883 times.

Quoting CYatUK (Reply 29):

Could we say the same about IAE?

IAE doesn't really "exist." It's a joint venture between RR, PW, and a few other companies. It's a paper company, basically. RR has no horse in the race (they really haven't been very strong in the NB market since the 747), but PW does.

CFM also doesn't have a horse in the race, but GE does.

I think that CFM and IAE are probably finished. They'll continue to support existing engines, but I doubt they'll be coming out with any new ones.

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 61):
There is a new program, we're very excited about the new program, we have no launch customer, it enters service when much newer a/c are coming on line as well, we don't expect current customers to switch, but we know this is the right thing to do? Are we having fun yet?
Quoting Aesma (Reply 59):

I don't think there is a way to improve comfort level much.

Bingo. The sidewalls aren't going to contribute much to your comfort. And, after you've sat on a plane (whether it's a 707 or a 787) for several hours, you really just want to get out of your cramped Y-class seat.

The pretty LED lights are a nice touch, as are recontoured bins and all that jazz. But in the end, a Y seat is a Y seat.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aesma
Posted 2010-12-01 15:01:35 and read 19807 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 106):
CFM also doesn't have a horse in the race, but GE does.

I think that CFM and IAE are probably finished. They'll continue to support existing engines, but I doubt they'll be coming out with any new ones.

The LEAP-X is a CFM engine !

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-01 15:09:15 and read 19769 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 101):
On the commercial aircraft side of opportunities, one option would be a true 2-class single aisle optimized platform for the 120 to 150 seat segment which Embraer can build, and 160 o 220 twin aisle trans-con built by Boeing with flight crew commonality between the two platforms at the very least.

I think this has been a strategic option for years, I did a little research in 07 and proposed a 120-165 seater. Henry made a great artist impression of this LRJ (large regional jet   )

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...Boeing_Embraer_Y1_narrow_bod-1.jpg
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/3513052/

Airbus has made advances towards Embraer in recent years too.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: davs5032
Posted 2010-12-01 15:15:16 and read 19704 times.

The A318 is not going to be included in the NEO program. If Airbus is hinting otherwise, it is purely a strategical move to further delay Airlines' decisions on the C series. Why would they sink more $$ into a variant that was unsuccessful even when competition such as the Cseries wasn't around?

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 103):
It will be a blood bath.

That we can agree on.

-I also have some questions, for those of you who might know. How much will the NEO's be listed @, and at how much discount do you think Boeing will offer the 737. What amount of price separation will Boeing need to create to counter the economic advantages of the NEO?

-Also, as to the "797", I'm under the impression that A/B clean sheet NB's are being put on hold by limited engine technology advancements which may not come for another 10-15 years. Having said this, what is preventing Boeing from introducing a new model encompassing new fuselage/wing technologies, then just re-engining later when the technology makes itself available? If a plane is designed to allow for future engine upgrades (like the A320), why must the entire program be tolled until the specific engine technology exists?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: PresRDC
Posted 2010-12-01 15:29:07 and read 19618 times.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 106):
IAE doesn't really "exist." It's a joint venture between RR, PW, and a few other companies. It's a paper company, basically. RR has no horse in the race (they really haven't been very strong in the NB market since the 747), but PW does.

Not sure you really understand what a joint venture actually entails. They are not "paper" companies by any stretch. For the record, CFMI is also a joint venture.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 15:54:21 and read 19517 times.

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 109):
What amount of price separation will Boeing need to create to counter the economic advantages of the NEO?

How should Boeing discount their B737s to compete with the NEO?

Airbus will still offer the original A32x-family as lowcost option.

So basically Boeing has one family to offer, Airbus has two.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: bravo1six
Posted 2010-12-01 15:57:36 and read 19493 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 103):
Airbus will then deeply discount the A319neo, throw in spare parts, free training, and god knows what else that Bombardier will need to counter to. It will be a blood bath.

And can be a dangerous game to play. Many countries, as well as the WTO, have "anti-dumping" rules in place.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 15:59:15 and read 19481 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 108):
I think this has been a strategic option for years,

Sure and they will re-visit this option as part of their homework.

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 109):
what is preventing Boeing from introducing a new model encompassing new fuselage/wing technologies, then just re-engining later when the technology makes itself available?

Putting aside the 787 delays and the slow selling 748, Boeing's approach to launching any all new design seems to be less based on perceived threats (which is what Airbus does), and more to do with a product that is actually being threatened (the Cseries and A320neo are possible perceived threats from Boeing's perspective). The B737 Classics, B767, and B744 all were replaced with new designs or significant design changes as they were no longer selling well. So Boeing will probably stay put and focus on selling as many 737s and 777S as possible while addressing the 787 and 748 issues. They will not jeopardize their cash cows by indicating that they need to be addressed. In 3 or 4 years from now, Boeing can launch the 797 and that would take the sizzle out of the A320neo even if the 797 may start deliveries 4 or 5 years after the launch. So Boeing needs to sweat out on the 787 not the A320neo.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-01 16:01:43 and read 19526 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 95):
The A321 already offers significantly larger payload over longer distances then the slow selling 737-900ER.

Boeing.com says the -900ER will do 3200 nm with 180 passengers. Airbus.com says the 321 with sharklets will do 3200nm with 185 passengers. I wouldn't call a 5 passenger delta as significant.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 102):
You're saying Boeing (or Airbus for that matter) can make an all new plane in 4 years ? Optimistic much ?

No. I never said all new plane. I'm saying Boeing can do an NEO in 4 years. They only took 3 years to upgrade the Classic to the NG and that needed an all new wing, new engines, significantly new cockpit, as well as fuselage changes.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 16:04:43 and read 19462 times.

Quoting bravo1six (Reply 112):
And can be a dangerous game to play. Many countries, as well as the WTO, have "anti-dumping" rules in place.

Giving discounted prices, spares, training, are not dumping. they are part of the package. Plus with 95% commonality, Airbus will amortize its costs even further, negotiate better deals with suppliers for the A320neo making discounting more offer-able.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CFBFrame
Posted 2010-12-01 16:06:11 and read 19453 times.

Quoting keesje (Reply 69):
Coupron (ILFC) : “If indeed the Airbus product offering offers a 15 percent more fuel efficient aircraft, then Boeing has to respond,”


See my answer below. By the way they have responded and the message is clear. Do all you want to have big fanfare, because this is the Airbus show!!!

Quoting Aesma (Reply 102):
I'm not sure I follow. The A318 is already more advanced than its brethren, with tricks like laser welded lower fuselage. How would it shed more weight than the bigger planes in the family ?


The 318 is a piece of junk that's always been too heavy, put heavier engines and sharklets on it and it moves in the negative direction.

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 109):
Having said this, what is preventing Boeing from introducing a new model encompassing new fuselage/wing technologies, then just re-engining later when the technology makes itself available? If a plane is designed to allow for future engine upgrades (like the A320), why must the entire program be tolled until the specific engine technology exists?


They don't have to!! Airbus just gave Boeing 5 years to develop their new a/c!!! Boeing can say comfortably for the next five years that they are looking into developing a NEO without much issue from the market. Here's why. Boeing is already offering an improved variant today, which gives every customer an annual saving of 2-4%. They can work with the engine manufacturers who are working with AIrbus to bring the two "NEW" engines to market by 2016. Any failures or startup issues will be carried 100% by Airbus and the other new entrants coming on line in 2016. Boeing will know as soon as everyone else the target, and the mods required. On entry day of NEO in 2016, Boeing can announce the new a/c and say first flight is 5 years from that date. All future sales will go to the new config while Airbus continues to fight the CSeries for the other market with a dated strategy. Leahy knew this and that's why he wanted Boeing to get in the boat with him.

That A321 opportunity that my friend speaks often of will dry up when Boeing announces the 757 replacement on NEO's EIS day. And, between now and EIS of NEO Boeing will have no competition for their 737s because Airbus will only be able to offer the NON O classic; with sharklets by the way after 2012. The Airbus hand has been played and we won't know how successful it has been for five years. So what's Boeing move? Keep quite until the second quarter of 2016, no reason to change the current strategy; ride that old airframe with slight improvements until then. They're winning orders now, they're not doing anything to add fleet wide complexity, and any mods are not going to take 5 years to implement. Took me awhile to reason through this, because I knew Leahy wants/needs to kill the CSeries for some major reason. Any sale CSeries makes today is a post 2016 sale lost for NEO not for Boeing. By the way Boeing can hold current pricing constant because Airbus has to sell a less competitive product for the next 5 YEARS. Which means that when Airbus and Boeing go head to head, its a very different fight than when NEO and CSeries go head to head. But for Airbus, price will be a major factor in both negotiations. Kind of explains why Leahy hopes the backlog remains protected.

So tell me why this theory is crazy? I hope you have pictures to display.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 16:09:30 and read 19451 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 111):
How should Boeing discount their B737s to compete with the NEO?

Depending on how many they sell, they may not have to. They've sold an entire year's worth of production in 2010. If they can keep that up going forward, they push the backlog that farther back and keep the line filled closer to the time they intend to launch their neo or a new plane.





I feel Airbus launching the A320neo is likely a multi-segment defensive move.

It is scheduled to enter service around the same time Bombardier will be reaching full production and when Bombarider needs orders to keep the line full.

It improves the A320's position against the 737NG five years from now, but the total operating costs reductions are not going to be 15% and may not even be 10%, plus there will be a higher acquisition cost and an impact on values and transaction prices of the A320-non. If Airbus can secure 10% more deliveries after 2015, I'll be impressed.

It's a relatively inexpensive and low-risk (for Airbus, maybe not so much CFM and especially P&W) enhancement to keep a desirable plane in the 2010s desitable through the 2020s.

[Edited 2010-12-01 16:30:34]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 16:10:41 and read 19464 times.

The Thomas Cook Group has selected the A320-family as their sole narrowbody to reduce costs.

The NEO is not mentioned in the article, but the A321NEO makes good sense as B752-replacement.


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...-as-baseline-for-common-fleet.html

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 16:22:40 and read 19380 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 117):
Depending on how many they sell, they may not have to.

You did not read my complete post 111...

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2010-12-01 16:22:50 and read 19398 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 113):
jeopardize their cash cows by indicating that they need to be addressed. In 3 or 4 years from now, Boeing can launch the 797 and that would take the sizzle out of the A320neo even if the 797 may start deliveries 4 or 5 years after the launch. So Boeing needs to sweat out on the 787 not the A320neo.

When Boeing launches the 797 in 3 or 4 years from now with truckload of promises of improved economics, nobody will belive them because of the trackrecord with the 787.
I have a hard time beliveing that nobody will sign up for a new Boeing product, without a very carefully written performance and delivery guaranty written itno their contracts.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: bravo1six
Posted 2010-12-01 16:26:41 and read 19365 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 115):
Giving discounted prices, spares, training, are not dumping

If the total package results in a price that is lower than the cost to produce, then yes it can be dumping. I'm not saying it is dumping, I'm saying that it can be a dangerous game to play (especially if it can be shown that the reason for doing so is to keep a competitor out).

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 16:29:54 and read 19385 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 119):
You did not read my complete post 111...

I read it, but I asked myself why would any customer buy the A320 when the A320neo is said to be so much better (per the more ardent Airbus Aficiandoes)? These people claim an A320neo's fuel efficiency will render the 737 irrelevant, so why would it also not render the A320non irrelevant, since it has the same "terrible" efficiency as the 737NG?

The only A320-200 Airbus should be able to deliver after 2015 is an A320-200neo.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: RoseFlyer
Posted 2010-12-01 16:33:34 and read 19368 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 114):
Quoting keesje (Reply 95):
The A321 already offers significantly larger payload over longer distances then the slow selling 737-900ER.

Boeing.com says the -900ER will do 3200 nm with 180 passengers. Airbus.com says the 321 with sharklets will do 3200nm with 185 passengers. I wouldn't call a 5 passenger delta as significant.

Be careful how you read Keesje's words. He is actually correct (and will show you a chart to prove his point that is a bit misleading), although in reality his statement has questionable relevance. The A321 is a larger airplane and has a higher MTOW and useable payload. The 739ER is a slightly smaller airplane and typically carries fewer passengers. At normal operating load, the 739ER has longer range than any version of the A321, but that isn't Keesje's point. If you put the same amount of payload in the A321, it will go further (and of course you have a few extra empty seats) and also burn more fuel in the process and have a higher CASM since it is a larger and heavier plane.

In the airline industry everyone compares CASM (Cost per Available Seat Mile) to get around the point that Keesje is using. If a 100 seat plane has the same CASM on the routes that airline X operates as does a 180 seat airplane on the same route, the airline is likely to go for the 100 seat plane and take the extra flexibility presuming slots and airport space are available.

With that said, I think the A321 is a great airplane that has sold well and has a definite market. What I disagree with is the presumption that the 739ER is inferior. The 738, A320 and A321 have all sold well. However the 738 is where Boeing will focus its dollars on improving since almost 90% of 737s built today are 737-800s.

I can't wait to see where the NEO pushes the market and the reactions by all the players. It is an exciting time for aviation enthusiasts because one of the main players just showed their cards.

[Edited 2010-12-01 16:40:06]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: jdevora
Posted 2010-12-01 16:40:29 and read 19307 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 46):
If Airbus can increase the MTOW of the 321NEO while the are at it, of lets say 3000kg, they have a very capable aircraft.
Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 65):
I would guess that they are planning to do a lot more than put new engines on the A320. Maybe they just don't want to trigger a response from Boeing yet.

I think that they are doing an extra effort to keep it as "just new engines"
* Less risk of delays
* Keep commonality, only the engines are new (if you want them), the rest of the plane is the same
* Keep resale value, they keep building the A320 much longer
* Much cheaper, specially important when "do nothing" was on the table as well


A few references:
FG: Airbus aims to 'keep it simple' with A320 NEO
Video released today, JL's comments about the NEO
Global Investor Forum 2010. John Leahy's speech. From the minute 16 on he talks about NEO and explains why wans to keep it simple

Cheers
JD

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 16:42:39 and read 19299 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 122):
The only A320-200 Airbus should be able to deliver after 2015 is an A320-200neo.

I agree with you, but maybe the request to offer both variants is airline-driven.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2010-12-01 16:52:25 and read 19249 times.

What are they going to call the 320 NEO? 320-300?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-01 16:53:31 and read 19328 times.

Quoting KFlyer (Reply 13):
IMHO, I do not expect Boeing to announce anything before year end - and expect a 797 EIS in 2018 or later.

ILFC doesn't expect a Boeing answer for another six months.
And nobody expects a brand new design as the technology (materials + engines ) won't allow a significant improvement on the NEO for another 10 years.
That's what Leahy was using as his reason for the NEO.

Quoting keesje (Reply 28):
I see this announcement as a first step towards specifying the NEO.

Actually, the first tangible sign was his press conference at the investors meeting, in which he was asking the audience to expect a decision (the ATO or authorisation to offer, in his yuckspek) before the end of the year...He was just a bit earlier than everybody anticipated.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 30):
- Remarkable how many posters here did not "see" that coming. But the signs were evident and consistent all the time (including the 15% figure).

A few eggs on a few faces have never hurt physically...or have they ?

Quoting parapente (Reply 37):

2016 is a good EIS IMHO.It is the year that Cfm are contracturally obliged to have the production engines coming off the line for the 919 (even if the plane is delayed).So they "know" they will have at least one engine ready.They will also know absolutly all the charistics (inc weight/thrust/Fuel burn) of the engine

Agreed. People don't seeem to know that those new engines are still in their infancy.

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 47):
a MTOW increase of 3 tons needs to be clarified further. Are we talking about fuel, payload or both? If payload, then you'd need to look at beefing up the wing structure to cater for the increased bending moment,

It's always both... As you'd need extra fuel to carry that extra load...Let's put it this way : at the end of the full load range graph, about 20% of the MTOW increase will be taken by fuel...so the raio is 20/80 ; for higher fuel loads, the range starts increasing...

Quoting parapente (Reply 49):
Reply 47.
If Airbus can increase the MTOW of the 321NEO while they are at it, of lets say 3000kg, they have a very capable aircraft.
     

Interesting point.One limitation must I guess be pavement loading at some airports.

Hey ! remember that a boggie gear had been designed for Indian Airlines and that possibility still is available. That would take care of that problem, if it came...but remenber, the airplane could be in fact lighter !

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Rotate

Quoting Stitch (Reply 64):
I can't believe it will take Airbus five years to adapt the LEAP-X and PW1100G to the A320 platform.

The unavailability of the engines allows them to refine the design to the max... plus a rather nice cushion of a backlogged bunch of airplanes...

Quoting ER757 (Reply 72):
ng XT6Wagon (Reply 44):
the NEO is extra cost and risk for marginal improvement.

15% efficiency gain and 500 nm range improvement don't sound marginal to me

See above, that if the extra 3 tons on MTOW is just fuel.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 107):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 106):
CFM also doesn't have a horse in the race, but GE does.

I think that CFM and IAE are probably finished. They'll continue to support existing engines, but I doubt they'll be coming out with any new ones.

The LEAP-X is a CFM engine !

  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 16:56:02 and read 19277 times.

Quoting bravo1six (Reply 121):
I'm saying that it can be a dangerous game to play (especially if it can be shown that the reason for doing so is to keep a competitor out).

Very difficult to prove given how these deals are made. Furthermore Airbus can do exactly what Embraer did to Bombardier when Bombardier took Embraer to the WTO. The CSeries can be challenged for illegal subsidies as for beginners rightly or wrongly to tie Bombardier and the Canadian government in the courts. There is no way Bombardier would challenge Airbus at the WTO even if they thought they had a good case as the repercussions are too great too risk.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 17:03:38 and read 19286 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 114):
Boeing.com says the -900ER will do 3200 nm with 180 passengers. Airbus.com says the 321 with sharklets will do 3200nm with 185 passengers. I wouldn't call a 5 passenger delta as significant.

It's more than just passengers - the A321-200 can lift four tons more total payload than a 737-900ER. It can also fly 250nm farther at maximum structural payload.

Of course the real issue for the 737-900ER is that Boeing took so long to offer it that most customers went with the A321-200 vs. the 737-900.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: ikramerica
Posted 2010-12-01 17:32:43 and read 19140 times.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 123):
Be careful how you read Keesje's words. He is actually correct (and will show you a chart to prove his point that is a bit misleading), although in reality his statement has questionable relevance. The A321 is a larger airplane and has a higher MTOW and useable payload. The 739ER is a slightly smaller airplane and typically carries fewer passengers. At normal operating load, the 739ER has longer range than any version of the A321, but that isn't Keesje's point. If you put the same amount of payload in the A321, it will go further (and of course you have a few extra empty seats) and also burn more fuel in the process and have a higher CASM since it is a larger and heavier plane.

It's the same straw man type of argument he used for a long time re: the 747-8. He said that because the A380 has wider Y seats, it's only right to put 9Y in the 748 for comparison, even though no airline is going to do this. He went months insisting this was the only "fair" comparison.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 17:40:13 and read 19092 times.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 130):
It's the same straw man type of argument he used for a long time re: the 747-8. He said that because the A380 has wider Y seats, it's only right to put 9Y in the 748 for comparison, even though no airline is going to do this. He went months insisting this was the only "fair" comparison.

And he is right about that!

The airlines feel the same and order A380/B777 instead of.

The B748I has a 9,5 y-seat cabin only.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-01 17:55:42 and read 19036 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 129):

It's more than just passengers - the A321-200 can lift four tons more total payload than a 737-900ER. It can also fly 250nm farther at maximum structural payload.

If your primary purpose is to haul passengers, it seems like a pretty good metric to me.

By the way, where can I get those numbers?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 17:58:27 and read 19027 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 132):
By the way, where can I get those numbers?
www.airbus.com/en

www.boeing.com/commercial

You'll want to look for the "Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning" documents.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-01 18:01:24 and read 19005 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 133):

Thanks. I was playing around in there. I went with the specs that each company was touting in their specs pages.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Delimit
Posted 2010-12-01 18:02:21 and read 18998 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 131):
The B748I has a 9,5 y-seat cabin only.

A 9.5 seat cabin?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: bravo1six
Posted 2010-12-01 18:07:18 and read 18991 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 128):
Very difficult to prove given how these deals are made. Furthermore Airbus can do exactly what Embraer did to Bombardier when Bombardier took Embraer to the WTO. The CSeries can be challenged for illegal subsidies as for beginners rightly or wrongly to tie Bombardier and the Canadian government in the courts. There is no way Bombardier would challenge Airbus at the WTO even if they thought they had a good case as the repercussions are too great too risk.

So we've very quickly gone from "it's not dumping" to "very difficult to prove" to "even if BBD could prove it they won't take on Airbus".

What was that you were saying about price discounts et al. not potentially being dumping?  

And as an aside, Bombardier wouldn't find itself in a court for any WTO related items, nor would it be taking on Airbus. Trade matters are government to government.

[Edited 2010-12-01 18:09:18]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 18:14:37 and read 18959 times.

Quoting Delimit (Reply 135):
A 9.5 seat cabin?

The width of the cabin in comparison to the B777 and A388 is too small to allow comparable seat comfort with 10 y-seats.

Therefore, in todays industry, the A388 is known as real 10-abreast, the B777 as real 9 abreast, the A330/340 as real 8 abreast aicrafts.

To offer comparable comfort on the B747 you have to either put only 9 y-seats in a row or increase your seat pitch.
Both makes the B747 less economical to operate.

But let us come back to the A32xNEO!  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: FlyNWA727
Posted 2010-12-01 18:18:30 and read 18962 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 120):
When Boeing launches the 797 in 3 or 4 years from now with truckload of promises of improved economics, nobody will belive them because of the trackrecord with the 787.

  Give me a break! In Boeing's 94 year history, the 787 debacle has undoubtedly been their biggest blunder... especially when you look at the last 20 years. And those blunders have very little if anything to do with the performance of the aircraft its self. So what negative "trackrecord" with the 787, does Boeing have, outside of a very serious delay issue??? If customers can still trust in Airbus, a company that has over-promised and under-delivered on many projects, including the A340-600, A380, and the original A350 ... all of which are very recent programs, then something tells me that people won't be giving Boeing—a much trusted company—too much flack. Let's get real.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 18:20:43 and read 18928 times.

What i am wondering about:


How many cancelations will we see now for the "old" A32x-family and the B737NG?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: planemaker
Posted 2010-12-01 18:21:40 and read 18920 times.

Quoting bravo1six (Reply 136):
Trade matters are government to government.

Yes, technically it is government to government but the practical battle is actually aircraft maker vs aircraft maker using their respective governments to represent them at the WTO. Without a national aircraft maker to push them, no government is going to go to the WTO on its own.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Delimit
Posted 2010-12-01 18:22:55 and read 18914 times.

With an EIS of 2016+...none?

And that bit about seat width is absurd.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: CFBFrame
Posted 2010-12-01 18:42:39 and read 18855 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 120):
When Boeing launches the 797 in 3 or 4 years from now

Why would they do it so soon? There's a natural 5 year window.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 139):
How many cancelations will we see now for the "old" A32x-family and the B737NG?

Why would there be any?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: bravo1six
Posted 2010-12-01 18:45:38 and read 18859 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 139):
What i am wondering about:


How many cancelations will we see now for the "old" A32x-family and the B737NG?

Chances are - none.

A customer who has signed up for either likely doesn't have any right to cancel. Some recent A32x customers might have been given "conversion" rights to a NEO version, and some other A32x customers may ask Airbus for the right to convert (and presumably Airbus would be more than happy to do so). So on the Airbus side you won't see cancellations per se, but perhaps conversions.

I suspect that 737NG customers probably don't have a clause that says "If Airbus launches the A320 NEO the I can cancel my 737NG".  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: ikramerica
Posted 2010-12-01 18:52:41 and read 18865 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 131):
And he is right about that!

You obviously are Keesje with an alias, because no other person makes and defends this argument. No airline is going to put 9Y on a 747, and for many airline accountants, they would actually see the A380's 19" seat space as wasteful, flying too much volume around.

Comparisons between aircraft should be made based on how the aircraft will be typically outfitted, not based on some arbitrary idea of fairness.

The majority of airlines in the world put 17.9" or narrower seats in their Y cabins. That's on a 737, A320, 767, A330, 747, 777 etc. This will also be true in the A350 and 787 for most carriers.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 19:15:57 and read 18801 times.

Quoting bravo1six (Reply 143):
I suspect that 737NG customers probably don't have a clause that says "If Airbus launches the A320 NEO the I can cancel my 737NG".

You know that airlines find a lot of ways to get out of contracts if they really want...  
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 144):
You obviously are Keesje with an alias, because no other person makes and defends this argument. No airline is going to put 9Y on a 747, and for many airline accountants, they would actually see the A380's 19" seat space as wasteful, flying too much volume around.

No, i am not.
Keesje is dutch, i am german. (The netherlands and germany are both in europe and side-by-side, but not one country... )

But i have to admit that we often have equal positions.


Let us come back to the NEO, please.
The B747 is not worth to talk about it, as it is old iron and not competitive anymore.

The newest version B748I is far away from offering 15 percent lower fuel burn in comparison to the B744 as the NEO will offer against the A32x .

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-01 19:26:59 and read 18768 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 139):
How many cancelations will we see now for the "old" A32x-family and the B737NG?

Unlikely many.

As noted. tjhe A320neo is five years away - and this assumes CFM and P&W have engines ready by then, since they are the ones driving this more than Airbus, who is waiting with the airlines. So A320 customers will continue to place orders and take deliveries of the "regular" model until the "neo" becomes available.

As for the 737NG, again, airlines ordered the 737NG for various and sundry reasons and they are not going to make a wholesale switch to the A320neo just because it burns less fuel. Why? Because those fuel savings can quickly be buried under an avalanche of conversion costs including training, spares and other ancillaries.

And again, CFM and P&W are quite confident they can get a version of their engines on the 737NG as it exists. It may not be as "amazing" as the one on the A320, but when that fuel burn delta is more like 5% instead of 15%, then those conversion costs really hamper the desire of a large 737NG customer making said switch.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: RayChuang
Posted 2010-12-01 19:29:53 and read 18765 times.

I do think that JetBlue (B6) will very soon become an A320 NEO customer, if only to allow the A320 planes to fly non-stop between JFK and the US West Coast non-stop on a year-round basis. Maybe this will allow B6 to buy the A321 NEO so it could offer additional seating capacity on USA transcon and JFK-FLL/PBI flights?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-01 19:56:09 and read 18681 times.

Quoting bravo1six (Reply 136):
o we've very quickly gone from "it's not dumping" to "very difficult to prove" to "even if BBD could prove it they won't take on Airbus".

What was that you were saying about price discounts et al. not potentially being dumping?

I guess I should have qualified my phrase with "If there were any allegations, then......" Which is why WTO disputes within the aerospace sector has been about aircraft financing and program financing. To my knowledge no one has been able to come up with enough evidence that aircraft are being dumped (as it is very difficult to prove).

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 128):
o tie Bombardier and the Canadian government in the courts.
Quoting bravo1six (Reply 136):
And as an aside, Bombardier wouldn't find itself in a court for any WTO related items, nor would it be taking on Airbus. Trade matters are government to government.

I did include Canadian government as per my post. I was just referring to Bombardier as Planemaker also pointed out would be perhaps not in the courts but tied up as part of the legal matters.

[Edited 2010-12-01 20:27:57]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: BMI727
Posted 2010-12-01 20:16:43 and read 18623 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 139):
How many cancelations will we see now for the "old" A32x-family and the B737NG?

Probably none. Maybe a few customers towards the end of the A320 backlog will convert. And too many conversions could hurt Airbus, since it would hurt their backlog for the interim and eat up space once the NEO enters productio, effectively selling planes they've already sold.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 144):
because no other person makes and defends this argument. No airline is going to put 9Y on a 747, and for many airline accountants, they would actually see the A380's 19" seat space as wasteful, flying too much volume around.

I think that cabin space for the same number of seats is really an after the fact selling point for airlines.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 145):
Keesje is dutch, i am german. (The netherlands and germany are both in europe and side-by-side, but not one country...&nbsp Wink

You know that the flag you pick is in no way related to your actual nationality? I could try and pass myself off as Nigerian if I wanted too. (On the internet anyway)

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-01 20:21:39 and read 18616 times.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 149):
You know that the flag you pick is in no way related to your actual nationality? I could try and pass myself off as Nigerian if I wanted too.

I know, but i believe that Keesje is dutch as his flag and name shows.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2010-12-01 21:47:57 and read 18518 times.

Quoting FlyNWA727 (Reply 138):
So what negative "trackrecord" with the 787, does Boeing have, outside of a very serious delay issue???

The fact that a 20 year old airplane is eating up it's market share and rumor has it that it may even be superior to it for some missions. I think the 787 has lost a lot of its "mojo"   Will it be a great plane? Sure. Will it be the promised "game changer"? Not likely.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: flyorski
Posted 2010-12-01 23:27:54 and read 18357 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 151):
The fact that a 20 year old airplane is eating up it's market share and rumor has it that it may even be superior to it for some missions

What aircraft are you referring to?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Ferpe
Posted 2010-12-01 23:36:16 and read 18336 times.

The question of a new design relies heavily when the game-changing technologies (laminar flow wings, open rotor engines) are ready for prime time. Only then is the investment worth the money.

So where are we with these key technologies?:

- Airbus will fly a laminar flow (outer wing) prototype on a 340-300 in 2014, when is Boeing flying theirs?

- Open rotor engines takes at least another 8-10 years to get to market (my take)

Everything points to an all-new SA after 2020 for both players.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: rheinwaldner
Posted 2010-12-02 01:44:22 and read 18076 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 113):
The B737 Classics, B767, and B744 all were replaced with new designs or significant design changes as they were no longer selling well. So Boeing will probably stay put and focus on selling as many 737s and 777S as possible while addressing the 787 and 748 issues.

Very bad strategy. It made Airbus big. Nothing else.

We can see that if we quickly check the outcome of the opposing strategy: the A320 would never have been so successful if in 1985 Boeings would have offered a real competitor. The time gap of lacking competitivness was far too long. Airbus could only slip in and establish their current market presenece because of Boeing's virtual absence in that key segment. And still the 734 sales were "good" enough that Boeing was lulled in a false sense of security. Same with the 744. It was not replaced before it was too late.

Slow sales is an indicator that pops up too late normally...

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 116):
By the way Boeing can hold current pricing constant because Airbus has to sell a less competitive product for the next 5 YEARS.

I think you could wake up hard one day. Even the premise is doubtful (that the A320 is less competitive).

Quoting Stitch (Reply 117):
It improves the A320's position against the 737NG five years from now

Backlog is so large that a lot of the free 737NG delivery positions are not available much earlier anyway.

The NB order behaviour in the next years will follow similar to the pattern of the early 787 orders (notice that the 787 improved by a similar amount as does the A320NEO):

- The A320NEO will make quickly a lot of sales.

- The hype for all old models will calm down significantly. Most will be follow-up orders and orders because of early availability. But early is not so early anyway in this case.

- After the first delivery slots for the A320NEO are filled (I mean for deliveries up until 2018-2019), sales for 737 will recover a bit again. Even more if A320NEO would be as delayed as the 787 is. But that is very unlikely.

Quoting FlyNWA727 (Reply 138):
If customers can still trust in Airbus, a company that has over-promised and under-delivered on many projects, including the A340-600, A380

You are wrong about the A340NG. And the A380 only missed the promised timelines. Nothing else.

But it never comes close to the 787 as a materialized promise breaker. It was a nice "promise" that in 2008 you could fly 787's with certain capability. So nice it generated extraordinary interest and sales. Only the promise was not kept.

The first delivery of on-spec dreamliners could easily be delayed 5 years in the end. That track record will be in mind of airlines who shall sign 797 orders in 2012 for delivery in 2018.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-02 03:16:09 and read 17933 times.

I guess everbody has their own agenda and I am no different.For me the NEO project has always been about the 320 and 321.I feel the 2010 Airbus business summary Pdf repoert that came out 24 hours (I think) prior to the NEO announcement said it all.They talked only about the 757 market segment and the business opportunity thay saw there.(700plus aircraft).

There have been various posts as to what the MTOW of a 321NEO might be.Answer we just don't know.But according to Airbus releases the new (more powerful/efficient) engines are going to be lighter.We also know that not only can an existing 320 wing lift more ,but adding B winglets increases the wings ability in this regard. (if Boeings figures are repeated - and why not).

As pointed out - regarding pavement loading.Either it won't be an issue as the increased nombers will fall within acceptable limits (note Airbus themselves have discussed a 322 in the past).But even if not there is as shown above an existing double bogy arrangement on the shelf if required.

As such I can well see why Airbus are concentrating on the 320/321 series.Thats why these 2 aircraft are coming out first in the same year. It now makes sense why Chinese airlines were so reluctant to "give" big initial orders to the 919 on what must (surely) have been phenominal prices. Particularly when a new assembly line for the 320 is now in China.

Alot has been said about the TATL abilities of such an aircraft.And this is true - particularly post 2016 when the 757's will really start showing their age.But others recently have been looking at Europe/N Africa and Near East destinations.Not my strong point but perhaps equally valid.The same may be true (don't know) of trips from North to South America Dunno).

All in al one hell of a potental market I feel.

What is additionally attractive is the speed such an aircraft can fly.Perhaps an odd thing to say.But as everyone notes the "gamechanger" that is the great unknown is whether the Safran/RR open rotor development will amount to anything. Leap-X is a phenominal "core" that has been shown to be designed to take a myriad of "fan/ bladed" options.

What is certain though is that OR is "force majeur" slower.This does not matter (Keejse's famous RR graph!) for classic LCC routes of 1-3 hours,but it really will start to matter after that.As such this (normal speed) 200- 220- plus (if new galley arrangement is incorporated) seater will have a life even if OR is prooved to be viable. Note 2016 EIS has one further significance. It is the year Safran/RR have stated that their proof of concept OR engines will fly on a wing(s) of a test aircraft.That will decide one way or the other what direction Airbus (at least) will take concerning a total replacement programme. (note if it fails it ain't bad to have a 319NEO already in your pocket!).

As for the 319.I tend to agree with Boeing and others.Namely that the benefits start to get very marginal - and perhaps disappear completely on short trips. No as Airbus stated.That aircraft is there to ensure that the Bombardier "C" is still born.Hence the unusual acidity of the tone of voice of "Mr Mouth" from Airbus!

If Bombardier cannot recover from this quickly they are going to be in big trouble I feel.Note LH now has a real alternative to the "C" in the 319NEO. You can bet your granny that Airbus will be waiting in the wings to offer LH a very fancy deal if required (clever 'ol LH bet they had this covered all along).

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: ElbowRoom
Posted 2010-12-02 04:52:02 and read 17786 times.

Quoting parapente (Reply 155):
guess everbody has their own agenda and I am no different.

 Wow!  
Quoting parapente (Reply 155):
For me the NEO project has always been about the 320 and 321.I feel the 2010 Airbus business summary Pdf repoert that came out 24 hours (I think) prior to the NEO announcement said it all.They talked only about the 757 market segment and the business opportunity thay saw there.(700plus aircraft).

   Airbus was covering the segment that would be best addressed by a 5-abreast aircraft (say 120-150 seats), with a pair of 6 abreast aircraft: the A318 (72 operating) and the A319 (1267 operating) .

Why did they get away with it for so long? (and likewise Boeing with the 736 and 73G?)

Was it because the 5 abreast offerings were all unattractive in important ways?
- Airbus didn't have a 5 abreast fuselage on offer at all, so nothing for Airbus operators wanting commonality
- the 717 didn't have the economics to compete despite being the 'right' overall shape and size - was the aerodynamics not up to par, or the weight?
- the Fokker 100 lacked up-to date engines.

Maybe what's changed is that the C Series is a well-thought-out 5 abreast design, optimised for 120-150 seats. Airbus knows they probably have lost this battle (?), and are concentrating on producing a good design for an entirely new narrowbody capable of beating the C Series on CASM, using newer technologies, and sized about 180-220 like the A320 and A321.

The NEO is a very worthwhile transitional product, and a good value proposition for airlines looking for a full/partial fleet replacement starting in 2016/7.

Just guessing.
ER

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Aesma
Posted 2010-12-02 06:32:42 and read 17604 times.

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 144):
You obviously are Keesje with an alias, because no other person makes and defends this argument. No airline is going to put 9Y on a 747, and for many airline accountants, they would actually see the A380's 19" seat space as wasteful, flying too much volume around.

Well, I only flew the 744 once (return) and I clearly wasn't impressed by the comfort of a 10 abreast Y seat to say the least ! In fact I spent most of my time trolling around the plane (a Corsair charter full of young "pilgrims" for the world youth day).

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: RoseFlyer
Posted 2010-12-02 07:25:02 and read 17474 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 145):
You know that airlines find a lot of ways to get out of contracts if they really want...

I think some airlines might go from A320 to NEO, however I don't see airlines being eager to switch existing 737 orders since they would lose their deposits. There is a reason why so many airlines have options rather than firm orders. It is so they don't have to pay the deposits.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 139):


How many cancelations will we see now for the "old" A32x-family and the B737NG?

Well A320 rate is going up along with 737 rate, so I don't see many in the near future.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2010-12-02 08:05:02 and read 17364 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 120):
When Boeing launches the 797 in 3 or 4 years from now with truckload of promises of improved economics, nobody will belive them because of the trackrecord with the 787.

Boeing has trashed their reputation of delivering on schedule; it remains to be seen whether or not they have also damaged their reputation for delivering to (or above) spec. If the 787 performs as advertised then the airlines will be wary about delivery schedules but not performance promises.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JerseyFlyer
Posted 2010-12-02 08:49:17 and read 17250 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 100):
So, Airbus has provided the additional airframe weight (without engines, nacelles, pylons) for the NEO:


http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...fer-neo-version-of-a318-leahy.html


250-300Kgs additional empty weight.

Yes, BUT it qualifies this with "Excluding engines, nacelles and pylons" which will surely add weight additionally.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-02 09:41:15 and read 17131 times.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 154):
Very bad strategy. It made Airbus big. Nothing else.

I would not say that Boeing's strategy on new product launches are bad. They have done very well with the 744, 777, 737NG, and once out of the 787 certification mess, they will do well there as well. They messed up on the 737 Classics as a half-ass attempt in countering the A320, but have done very well in the last 20-25 years. We will see how commercially successful the A380 will be. Airbus did well on the A320 and A330 that I will give them, but commercially I think the 300-400 seat market using the 4 -engine approach A340 was a hasty decision and should have waited until the engine technology was ready which is what Boeing did with the 777. Overall, both OEMs have their share of successful and poor performing decision.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 159):
Boeing has trashed their reputation of delivering on schedule;

Boeing messed up on the initial 747-100 development too. Overall I would not say that their reputation is garbage in the same way I would not say that about Airbus because of the A380 delays. They are both delivering excellent quality products in their existing product line. I think that Boeing will look at the 787 development program and pull out a lessons learned and compare to the 777 and perhaps even the 757/767 which were executed very well. My guess is they will go back to the way they developed programs like the 777: more in house, less risky outsourcing, retain more experienced engineers, etc. They put a low risk factor on outsourcing and over cost cutting measures they took in place so the program will take a hit. But over 20 years, it will still be profitable.

I don't expect Boeing to make a hasty decision on the A320NEO. They will make a decision or decisions (737 and/or 777 replacements) in 3 years from now when their desk is cleared with the 787 and 748.

I think Boeing don't really care about the sub 150 seat market as much as Airbus seems to, and that will play in their planning going forward.

Airbus on the other hand seems obsessed at a wider market coverage range and I think this is dictated by EADS. If one looks at things from EADS perspective and not just Airbus, they are the only other players over Bombardier in the large turboprop market through their ownership structure of ATR by the venture with Alenia. Alenia a few years ago wanted to buy them out, and EADS would not let go. So as a whole, EADS wants to play in the commercial aircraft business in as many leagues as possible. Very different than Boeing.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-02 20:30:12 and read 16690 times.

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 160):
Yes, BUT it qualifies this with "Excluding engines, nacelles and pylons" which will surely add weight additionally.

I would not say so automatically.

- The pylon weight might be unchanged, because of smaller dimensions.

- The engine is likely to be heavier.

- The nacelle could have the same weight, because it is strongly depending on the materials used in comparison to todays nacelle.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: PlanesNTrains
Posted 2010-12-03 00:04:20 and read 16536 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 111):
Quoting davs5032 (Reply 109):
What amount of price separation will Boeing need to create to counter the economic advantages of the NEO?

How should Boeing discount their B737s to compete with the NEO?

Airbus will still offer the original A32x-family as lowcost option.

So basically Boeing has one family to offer, Airbus has two.

He asked NG vs NEO. Not sure why you went in another direction?

I do think it's interesting that Airbus will be competing with itself - offering a discounted A320classic against an upgraded but more expensive NEO. Maybe the question should be:

"What amount of price separation will Airbus need to create a counter to the economic advantages of the NEO?"

If your answer is that maybe they won't need to discount the "classic", then I'm not sure what you mean by "lowcost option"?

Quoting 328JET (Reply 125):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 122):
The only A320-200 Airbus should be able to deliver after 2015 is an A320-200neo.


I agree with you, but maybe the request to offer both variants is airline-driven.

Again, if there is a demand for a non-NEO, then there should still be a demand for a NG. And if the demand for the non-NEO is very passive, then why even offer it as an option? If the reason is to defer airlines from ordering a lower-priced NG, then they will also be competing with price against the NEO.

-Dave

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: rheinwaldner
Posted 2010-12-03 01:57:55 and read 16424 times.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 163):
then why even offer it as an option?

Because it does not cost a lot. Like the A340 which is also still on offer. Leahy said in audio stream that he does not believe that many old A320 will be built anymore, once A320NEO's come off the line. That directly indicates us how hot the 737NG production could run.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 163):
If there is a demand for a non-NEO, then there should still be a demand for a NG.

And if not? Then there would also be not much demand anymore for the 737NG? IMO clearly Yes! Especially if Boeing is working on Y1 at that time.

Announcing Y1 e.g. in 2011 could do more harm to 737NG sales than the A320NEO. Both factors together simply mean that for some years Boeing's NB market share will sharply drop to unfamiliarly low volumes. A blow would be if the CSeries start to sell better than the 737NG.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: rheinwaldner
Posted 2010-12-03 04:05:35 and read 16250 times.

Program cost seems to be 1bn €.
(from here http://de.reuters.com/article/topNews/idDEBEE6B100K20101202 )

The A320NEO seems to be the simplistic low-cost approach as announced. This is much less than predicted by many users on this site (who usually expect 2..3bn for a derivative).

This makes the promised gains and the solid EIS schedule even more stunning.

The extra effort Boeing would have to spend for the 737 could easily grow out of proportion.

If 1.3bn development cost trigger Airbus to ask for a 6mn higher price, how much would the price of a 737 need to be increased at 2..3bn development cost on Boeing's side?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: SEPilot
Posted 2010-12-03 04:34:09 and read 16203 times.

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 161):
They messed up on the 737 Classics as a half-ass attempt in countering the A320, but have done very well in the last 20-25 years. We will see how commercially successful the A380 will be. Airbus did well on the A320 and A330 that I will give them, but commercially I think the 300-400 seat market using the 4 -engine approach A340 was a hasty decision and should have waited until the engine technology was ready which is what Boeing did with the 777.

I have to disagree with your analysis. The 737 Classic was in service about the same time the A320 was launched, so it could hardly be a "counter" to it. The A340 was made with 4 engines because Airbus did not believe that ETOPS would catch on; Boeing believed in it. And the 777 engines were developed because Boeing wanted them; they were NOT developed before the 777. It is entirely possible that the engine manufacturers would not have been so responsive to Airbus at the time; they were after all just establishing themselves as a major player. But when Boeing said "Jump!" they said "How high?"

Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 161):

Boeing messed up on the initial 747-100 development too.

The 747 itself was on schedule; P&W had problems with the engines. But EIS was within months of schedule; Boeing did manage to make it in 1969, which was the promised year.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-03 08:34:45 and read 16049 times.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 165):
If 1.3bn development cost trigger Airbus to ask for a 6mn higher price, how much would the price of a 737 need to be increased at 2..3bn development cost on Boeing's side?

Somehow, Boeing managed to compete with the 320 quite nicely after they put a new wing, new pylons, new engines, modified gear, significantly new cockpit and sundry other changes to the Classic to create the NG. Since, they also have further modified the wing to accept the winglets.

So, for instance, while Airbus will have to modify the 320 wing to accept the sharklets, that work has already been done by Boeing.

Regardless of any assumptions to the contrary, Boeing had to do a lot more work going from the Classic to the NG than they will have to modifying the NG into their NEO.

Still, all this is hypothetical until Boeing makes a decision...which might not happen for a year or so.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2010-12-03 17:32:17 and read 15762 times.

Quoting 328JET (Reply 162):
- The nacelle could have the same weight, because it is strongly depending on the materials used in comparison to todays nacelle.

Nacelles have been on the forefront of materials technology for a long time...they went CFRP long before almost anything else. I'm not sure what material they're going to pull out that would produce any substantial weight change over what they've already got. Given that it's a substantially larger nacelle, I don't see any possible way it could be lighter.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 166):
The 747 itself was on schedule; P&W had problems with the engines. But EIS was within months of schedule; Boeing did manage to make it in 1969, which was the promised year.

But what EIS'd was *not* the airplane the airlines were expecting/wanting/promised...it took time after EIS to get the thing operating the way it was supposed to. Boeing traded maturity-at-EIS for schedule; that's certainly a legitimate business decision to make, but the 787 (and any other modern jet) should enter service in a far more capable state (ETOPS-out-of-the-box requires it if nothing else) than the 747-100 did.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-03 18:17:36 and read 15736 times.

I just can't help but chuckle at the Airbus Aficiandoes and their fervent wishes that come 2015, Boeing will be lucky to deliver one 777 and a dozen 737s a month because airlines will order 250 A350s and 1000 A320neos a year by then to support a 20 per month A350 delivery rate and an 80 per month A320neo delivery rate - which is what Airbus would need to replace Boeing's 777 and 737 monthly production.

And yet Boeing is planning production increases for both lines, and I imagine that is not so they can blow out the backlog by 2016 and then close the lines.   

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: BMI727
Posted 2010-12-03 19:42:11 and read 15676 times.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 164):
Announcing Y1 e.g. in 2011 could do more harm to 737NG sales than the A320NEO

So now Boeing shouldn't build new planes because it might jeopardize the meager number of sales they have left?  
Quoting Tangowhisky (Reply 161):
They messed up on the 737 Classics as a half-ass attempt in countering the A320,

Does Boeing still employ psychics?  
Quoting Stitch (Reply 169):
I just can't help but chuckle at the Airbus Aficiandoes and their fervent wishes that come 2015,

I think that somewhere in Seattle Boeing is filling a large walk in freezer with crows.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-03 20:19:25 and read 15654 times.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 170):
I think that somewhere in Seattle Boeing is filling a large walk in freezer with crows.

I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever that the A320neo will be a popular airplane. But even if it was so popular as to secure 75% of the annual orders for 150+ seat narrowbodies starting in 2011, I don't believe Airbus could actually deliver 75%.

With the planned production rate increases of 40 A320s and 35 737s per month, that is a combined total of 75 aircraft per month - or 900 a year.

To meet 75% of the demand, Airbus would need to increase capacity to 56 frames per month - an increase of forty percent. And that is not just Airbus needing to ramp up 40%, but all of their suppliers would have to ramp 40%. And the delivery system would need to increase by 40% to feed the parts into TLS and XFW. So that means more Belugas would need to be assembled along with increases in the other delivery systems Airbus uses.



And as for the 737 program being "killed" by the A320neo, thanks to securing orders worth at least 11 months worth of production, Boeing will end the year with around 2200 737s yet to be delivered. Assuming they never sold another one, that would be 55 months of production - enough to take Boeing into mid- 2016.

Now even the most rabid Airbus fan is not bold enough to assume Boeing will never sell another 737 after this month. But if we take their "worst" case scenario and Boeing sees it's orders halved from 450 to 225 per year, but still delivered 40 per month, that would be 1125 sales for the years 2011 to 2015, extending the backlog another two and a half years (so 2019). Boeing could reduce their production rate to extend that backlog into the 2020s, bridging the gap if they wanted to launch a new narrowbody program by then.

And if Boeing launches a 737neo with an EIS for around 2016, then they won't see their order intake drop 50% and that means the backlog will push even deeper into the 2020s.

[Edited 2010-12-03 20:20:43]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: 328JET
Posted 2010-12-03 20:30:37 and read 15636 times.

I think the A319NEO and A320NEO are not really dangerous for Boeing.

With good prizing the B737-700W and B737-800W could be sold in good numbers for a long time.


But the A321NEO is a "killer" if it really burns 15 percent less fuel than todays A321s.

It is the perfect B752-replacement on 99 percent of the routes and it will really be one class above the capabilities of the B737-900ER.

For both US airlines and european charter companies, the A321NEO could be the perfect aircraft.

I think the comment of the CEO of Delta tells a lot!

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: planemaker
Posted 2010-12-04 01:41:55 and read 15470 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 171):
With the planned production rate increases of 40 A320s and 35 737s per month, that is a combined total of 75 aircraft per month - or 900 a year.

In September B announced another rate hike.... to 38 737s/month in 2nd Qtr. 2013. Yikes!!  
Quoting 328JET (Reply 172):
With good prizing the B737-700W and B737-800W could be sold in good numbers for a long time.


Even without "good pricing" the 737s will nevertheless sell due to incremental orders from airlines with no Airbus NBs.

And, as Stitch clearly explained, there are limits to Airbus production that will turn some airlines to Boeing for earlier availability.

There are many angles to this "game". Airbus might win this NB "battle"... depends on what Boeing does... "to NEO or not to NEO". If Boeing does, then I believe the status quo will remain, more or less. On the other hand, if Boeing doesn't NEO, Airbus could potentially end up losing the NB "war" if Boeing comes out with a "killer" 737 replacement before 2020. It is obviously way to early to tell what will unfold and there will be conflicting predictions from consultants depending which way they lean. I don't think we know for several years. Until then... speculate away!

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2010-12-04 02:43:24 and read 15400 times.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 173):
Even without "good pricing" the 737s will nevertheless sell due to incremental orders from airlines with no Airbus NBs.

And, as Stitch clearly explained, there are limits to Airbus production that will turn some airlines to Boeing for earlier availability.

There are many angles to this "game".

If there is a High demand for the NEO, then Airbus can keep the discounts to a mininum and sell fewer planes but with higher revenues per unit. That way they can lessen the strain on the production line, and make better profit.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: mdword1959
Posted 2010-12-04 09:29:32 and read 15120 times.

Aircastle unimpressed by Airbus A320NEO

Quote:
"...This will be the first time in history where the same generation airplane will be replacing itself," said Wainshal. He calls the NEO a "half-way measure" that he predicts will be eclipsed by Boeing with a 737NG replacement model.

"I don't see lessees paying more for a fast-depreciating NEO than they do for current generation airplanes. I am very happy with the NG family we have, which is earlier production airplanes, because residual value exposure is much less than those in later years...."
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...unimpressed-by-airbus-a320neo.html

BTW, is the author of this article the same Scott Hamilton of Leeham News?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-04 09:51:09 and read 15072 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 174):
If there is a High demand for the NEO, then Airbus can keep the discounts to a mininum and sell fewer planes but with higher revenues per unit. That way they can lessen the strain on the production line, and make better profit.

Yes, but that means Airbus can only continue to deliver around 40 planes a month and therefore Boeing should see stable demand for the 737 to continue to support their own 35-40 frame per month delivery schedule and therefore Boeing is both not "knocked out of the market" and they don't have to invest in their own neo program.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: airbazar
Posted 2010-12-04 10:47:39 and read 15033 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 169):
I just can't help but chuckle at the Airbus Aficiandoes and their fervent wishes that come 2015, Boeing will be lucky to deliver one 777 and a dozen 737s a month because airlines will order 250 A350s and 1000 A320neos a year by then to support a 20 per month A350 delivery rate and an 80 per month A320neo delivery rate - which is what Airbus would need to replace Boeing's 777 and 737 monthly production.

Not any different from the Boeing fans really. I don't think Boeing's survival is at stake at all, that would be ridiculous, however market share is. Remember, B was caught with their pants down when Airbus launched the A300, they were caught with their pants down again when the A320 was launched, and they never expected the A330 to continue to sell as well as it has against the 787. They do have a history of underestimating the competition and the market. The number of customers who switched their fleets from 737 to A320, some of them quite important ones including a few right here in the US, is pretty large. Can Boeing afford another exhodus of customers to Airbus? Yes, AA, UA, DL may give Boeing the benefit of the doubt and wait a few years but what about the dozens of other importnt customers around the world who want/need an improved narrowbody yesterday? Only time will tell.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: planemaker
Posted 2010-12-04 11:04:01 and read 14996 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 177):
Can Boeing afford another exhodus of customers to Airbus? Yes, AA, UA, DL may give Boeing the benefit of the doubt and wait a few years but what about the dozens of other importnt customers around the world who want/need an improved narrowbody yesterday? Only time will tell.

A shift, yes, but there can be no "exodus" because of production limitations... and the fact that if Boeing does not "NEO", an all-new 737 will be around the corner in 3-4 years from A320 NEO EIS... and possibly as early as 2018.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-04 11:18:43 and read 14981 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 177):
Remember, B was caught with their pants down when Airbus launched the A300, they were caught with their pants down again when the A320 was launched, and they never expected the A330 to continue to sell as well as it has against the 787.

The A300 was more of a threat to early DC-10 and L-1011 models then it was anything in Boeing's lineup, since their model line was empty between the 707 and the 747 until the arrival of the 767 in 1980.

The A320 launched during the 737 Classic's launch, so it is not like Boeing could just stop the Classic and start over. As is, within a bit more than a decade they responded with the 737NG and have held their own since.

And if there were ~150 787s in revenue service today (with upwards of 10 a month coming off the line) per the original plan, the A330 likely wouldn't be securing the orders it has been the past two years.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-04 12:01:11 and read 14906 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 179):

The A320 launched during the 737 Classic's launch, so it is not like Boeing could just stop the Classic and start over.

Which didn't really seem to hurt Boeing since they sold almost 2000 Classics.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: XT6Wagon
Posted 2010-12-04 12:05:50 and read 14914 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 177):
B was caught with their pants down when Airbus launched the A300

Yes, Clearly Boeing was shocked when Airbus launched a poor selling widebody with 1,000nm passenger only range. Don't confuse the later A300 versions with what was sold at launch.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 179):
The A320 launched during the 737 Classic's launch, so it is not like Boeing could just stop the Classic and start over. As is, within a bit more than a decade they responded with the 737NG and have held their own since.

Also the classic dominated the A32x series for many years. Again it took Airbus years and updates to bring the sales up.

To continualy assert that Airbus hit it out of the park from day 1 of every program is not only highly wrong, I think it sells Airbus short in thier real accomplishments over the years. They took thier first effort which was completely useless for the majority of the market, and proceeded to evolve it to the A300-600, a highly effective plane both in passenger and cargo markets. They managed to break the death spiral of europe's aviation industry with this refusal to just give up when the first model didn't workout as planned.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-04 13:01:34 and read 14833 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 179):
The A320 launched during the 737 Classic's launch, so it is not like Boeing could just stop the Classic and start over. As is, within a bit more than a decade they responded with the 737NG and have held their own since.

And why was it that the classic could resist the A320 challenge ?
Wasn't it that the 'Bus was certified on the new, more stringent ( i.e safer ) regulations whereas the 737 was still certified on the *old* FARs by virtue of grandfather's rights ? A very simple and quick way for the FAA to keep the B baby alive and -very much- kicking
I have to admit that was a stroke of genius.
People here think that a 'sixties tech aircraft from the US was the equal, in terms of performance...etc... of a European airplane coming twenty years later...
And yet, that little bit of history is totally denied by the B' afficionados.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 167):
So, for instance, while Airbus will have to modify the 320 wing to accept the sharklets, that work has already been done by Boeing.

What you forget to mention is that NG+ winglets = 320 without sharklets
and that any progress introduced to the 'Bus will further increase its operational advantages over the NG (as you said, it's already been done...)

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2010-12-04 13:04:18 and read 14809 times.

Quoting airbazar (Reply 177):
Yes, but that means Airbus can only continue to deliver around 40 planes a month and therefore Boeing should see stable demand for the 737 to continue to support their own 35-40 frame per month delivery schedule and therefore Boeing is both not "knocked out of the market" and they don't have to invest in their own neo program.



It is not about knocking them out, it is about making money.
I am saying Airbus can deliver their 40 frames per month and sell them with much greater profit margin than Boeing can do, because they would have to discount heavily to stay in the game.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-04 14:05:20 and read 14724 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 182):
What you forget to mention is that NG+ winglets = 320 without sharklets
and that any progress introduced to the 'Bus will further increase its operational advantages over the NG (as you said, it's already been done...)

Actually, I didn't forget to mention it because it is not what I was talking about. I was speaking of the relative work required for each maker to NEO their aircraft. Both have a lot of work to do; Airbus more in some areas, Boeing in others.

It is generally accepted that the 737 would require more work but exactly how much more is conjecture.

And the NG currently matches the 320 with somewhat less efficient engines, so putting equal engines on both potentially making the NEO's equal enough as to not make any difference...just like now.

What Boeing will do requires a crystal ball that I don't think anyone in here has access to.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-04 14:20:04 and read 14695 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 182):
And why was it that the classic could resist the A320 challenge?

I'd argue it didn't. I would imagine Boeing didn't expect to have to replace the 737 Classic in 10 years.



Quoting Pihero (Reply 182):
A very simple and quick way for the FAA to keep the B baby alive and -very much- kicking.

But it's not really unique to the 737 - or other Boeing aircraft - is it? Was the MD-11 not at least partially grand-fathered in under the DC-10? Or the A300-600R under the A300B2?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-04 15:55:57 and read 14599 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 185):
Was the MD-11 not at least partially grand-fathered in under the DC-10? Or the A300-600R under the A300B2?

Semantics, semantics, as usual...
Not one of these aircraft had been given -by the new regs- any advantage over the competition...except the 737 against the A320.
It is also to notice that the A320 wasthe only airplane certified under 25-42 until it was changed to the 93-8 set of revisions...
The A320 spent more than ten years with a very unfair performance penalty...
Of course, when the 73 got its new systems, new wings and what have you, it was time to rejoin a common airworthiness set of rules.
Bloody well done !
An episode FAA/BCA can be real proud of, I guess.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: RoseFlyer
Posted 2010-12-04 17:00:27 and read 14547 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 182):

And why was it that the classic could resist the A320 challenge ?

The A320 and 737 Classic were quite different. In some areas, the A320 was far better. It has longer range, more payload and more capacity. However it is more expensive even than a A320 to operate on very short haul routes. The Classic was a very lightweight airplane. Even when compared to the NG, there are routes where a Classic is more efficient. However, the profile of the typical 737/A320 narrowbody flight has changed in the last 20 years. When the Classic was being designed, the average 737 route was about 62 minutes long. Currently the average route for that size plane is close to 120 minutes.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 182):
Wasn't it that the 'Bus was certified on the new, more stringent ( i.e safer ) regulations whereas the 737 was still certified on the *old* FARs by virtue of grandfather's rights ? A very simple and quick way for the FAA to keep the B baby alive and -very much- kicking
I have to admit that was a stroke of genius.
People here think that a 'sixties tech aircraft from the US was the equal, in terms of performance...etc... of a European airplane coming twenty years later...
And yet, that little bit of history is totally denied by the B' afficionados.

Being grandfathered in is not always a bad thing. It requires proven history, which is enough to justify the FAA requirements. If a part has survived in service for a certain number of cycles, then it is viewed as acceptable. It is true that the 737NG could not be certified from scratch with its existing architecture without modifications. However, the proven record of the 737 has pretty much worked out any potential problem areas through improvements continuously made. Honest question, does the more recent certification requirements of the A320 show as far as safety goes? Does the A320 have a better safety record than the 737NG?

I'm really confused why you say "a sixties tech aircraft from the US was equal in terms of performance" is a bad thing. Yes it has cable driven flight controls, but they have proven reliable. Boeing could have gone fly by wire, but found that any improvement gained would not be worth the cost and complexity of redesign. If there would have been a significant enough fuel burn or reliability improvement by going fly by wire, the NG would have gone that way. That is the only previous generation technology on the 737 that I know of. Staying cable controlled has allowed the airplane to only have 2.5 hydraulic systems and not need a RAT, which saves weight. The 737 continues flying with some 1960s technology, but you may be shocked to learn that the 777 also has 1960s technology in it since parts of that plane were carried over from previous designs since Boeing only redesigns parts if they will be better. The 777 still uses the same control column of the 767 & 737.

The 737-800 is about 3,000lbs lighter than the A320, yet seats about 8-12 more passengers. On a per seat basis, it has an advantage, even though it has some older technology (and with that said, many of the components that are from the 737-100 were actually carried over from the 727).

The 737NG definitely has some disadvantages being an updated model rather than being a new design. A quick look into the EE bay will show that the 737 has grown far beyond what it originally was with boxes stacked everywhere, whereas the A320 is a much cleaner package. The wheel well also shows that the growth in complexity of the NG has caused a shortage of space on board. The flight deck can be tight and noisy. However with all that said, the bottom line is that the NG has stayed a competitive product to the A320. It has some advantages such as lower weights, higher operating altitude (41K vs 38K), longer original design life (80K design cycles vs 48K design cycles which was later extended). Time will only tell what Boeing does in response to the NEO.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-04 19:44:54 and read 14424 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 186):
The A320 spent more than ten years with a very unfair performance penalty...

What was the performance penalty?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: packsonflight
Posted 2010-12-05 00:47:33 and read 14311 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 188):
What was the performance penalty?

The Airbus 320 was certified under a diffrent set of rules which made the aircraft less capaple on paper than the 737NG.
The performance certicication of the 737NG was grandfathered from the 737-100 vhich was certified in 1964
" A major change occurred when the FAA published an
amendment to FAR Part 25, known as “Amendment 25-42”. This amendment, which
became effective on March 1, 1978, revised the takeoff performance standards and
made them more restrictive.
To summarize, Amendment 25-42 required the accelerate-stop distance to
include two seconds of continued acceleration beyond V1 speed, before the pilot
takes any action to stop the airplane. It also introduced the notion of Accelerate-Stop
Distance all engines. This revision resulted in longer accelerate-stop distances for
airplanes whose application for a type certificate was made after amendment 25-42
became effective. The A320 was the first airplane to be certified under this rule,"

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2010-12-05 09:01:50 and read 14037 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 189):
The performance certicication of the 737NG was grandfathered from the 737-100 vhich was certified in 1964

Except for the minor detail that that's not true. The 737NG was certified to the FAR's up through amendment 25-77 (which includes amendment 25-42), with the exception of 15 FAR's which are called out in the type certificate data sheet. None of the FAR's that were grandfathered have anything to do with takeoff performance calculations.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 189):
" A major change occurred when the FAA published an amendment to FAR Part 25, known as “Amendment 25-42”. This amendment, which became effective on March 1, 1978, revised the takeoff performance standards and made them more restrictive.

Correct...and all these changes were rolled into the 737NG.

For the full list of exactly what was and wasn't grandfathered on the 737NG, start on p. 23 of the following PDF:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Gu...0552610/$FILE/A16WE%20Rev%2045.pdf

Tom.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-05 09:30:17 and read 13960 times.

Quoting packsonflight (Reply 189):
The A320 was the first airplane to be certified under this rule,"

...and you might add : "the ONLY aircraft certified under this rule as NPRM 93-8 followed, which became the standard airworthiness certification criterium... but only in 1998.
When the NG came along, enough had been done to the base-line 737 so that it could be certified under the same rules as the A320 (but not the original so-called *standards* as they only applied to one airplane, the one that challenged the 737 very existence) .
NPRM 93-8 is generally referred to as "post-amendment 25-42".
And before you lot would jump on me, I used to love the 73, on which I've logged some 5.500 hrs, 3,500 of them in command.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-05 12:00:31 and read 13801 times.

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 190):
Quoting packsonflight (Reply 189):
The performance certicication of the 737NG was grandfathered from the 737-100 vhich was certified in 1964

Except for the minor detail that that's not true. The 737NG was certified to the FAR's up through amendment 25-77 (which includes amendment 25-42), with the exception of 15 FAR's which are called out in the type certificate data sheet

It's probably a typo, Tom or packsonflight writing too quickly : Of course the airplane concerned with my initial comment were the series 200,300, 400, 500...those in the battle line against the 320 when it came out. As I wrote, when the NG happened, enough had been done, aerodynamically and otherwise to comply with the Post-amendment 25-42 standards.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-05 12:18:26 and read 13789 times.

The 737 Classic received her go-ahead in March 1981 (with the 737-300 model), while the A320 was launched in March 1984.

The 737-300 received FAA certification in November 1984. I am going to assume here that Boeing worked with the FAA on the certification program somewhere between program launch and roll-out of the first frame in January 1984 (first flight was the following month). We're all the FARs and such that the A320 had to comply with in 1984 in effect in 1981?

Also, what effect did the A320's newer systems, like FBW, have on her certification? If she'd used "traditional" cable controls like the 737, would she have had to meet all of the same FARs and certification hurdles? If Boeing had been first to introduce FBW on the 737 Classic, could they have leveraged as much of the 737 Jurassic's certification and FARs?

And what impact or influence did EASA and the ICAO have? Were they required to rubber-stamp the FAA's certification of the 737 Classic, or could they have required additional certification work?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-05 15:03:44 and read 13617 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
The 737 Classic received her go-ahead in March 1981 (with the 737-300 model), while the A320 was launched in March 1984.

Amendment FAR 25-42 was effective in Mach 1978, and by right should have been applied to the "Classics". But no,there was no retroactivity to the amendment and although the engines and some structural parts were new, the 100 / 200 certification was basically carried over to the new types.
As the 320 was a new design, it had to undergo all the rigours of the new regs.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
Also, what effect did the A320's newer systems, like FBW, have on her certification? If she'd used "traditional" cable controls like the 737, would she have had to meet all of the same FARs and certification hurdles?

Remember, I'm only talking *performance* in this discussion... Tom is more into general terms..
But...the only influence of the FBW in this perf certification is the definition of the stall speed, known in Europe as Vs1g, which is higher than the FAR defined stall speed ( remember, stalling an A320 in normal conditions is impossible).

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
If Boeing had been first to introduce FBW on the 737 Classic, could they have leveraged as much of the 737 Jurassic's certification and FARs?

I'm afraid that answer is beyond me as too many factors are involved... The way I see it, the FAA has always been very protective of the US airliner industry so I don't see them being as harsh on B - had it happened - as they were on AI.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
And what impact or influence did EASA and the ICAO have? Were they required to rubber-stamp the FAA's certification of the 737 Classic, or could they have required additional certification work?

EASA was created, IIRC in 2003 to become really effective in 2008, because the European JAA (joint Aviation Authority) had no power whatsoever, in terms of legal or judicial activities...It certainly could not enforce its own regs... Therefore, JAA was only there to rubberstamp the US FAR standards (yes, I know I'm exaggerating , but just a tiny bit ) and certainly hadn't the clout to fight any diktat from the FAA.
As for ICAO... let's charitably say that they're just there, as they have no technical means, no test facilities...to put into law what came from the USA.
I have to say that EASA changed the picture in a rather big way and nowadays, EASA and the FAA have to work together.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2010-12-05 15:31:54 and read 13577 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
We're all the FARs and such that the A320 had to comply with in 1984 in effect in 1981?

No, they amend the FARs every year. But it's not that simple...when you apply for a type certificate (or amended type certificate), you have to tell the FAA what amendment level of the FAR's you're going to use, then you can hold at that level for 5 years (otherwise the OEM's would be playing a perpetual catch-up). If it's an amended TC, then you have to negotiate with the FAA if you're going to use any "grandfathered" amendments. The actual set of FAR's that a particular design is certified to is highly dependent on the specifics to that design, timing, and negotiation. Eventually, it's all documented on the TCDS, but until they write that a lot of variance is possible.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
Also, what effect did the A320's newer systems, like FBW, have on her certification? If she'd used "traditional" cable controls like the 737, would she have had to meet all of the same FARs and certification hurdles?

She would have had to meet all the same FAR's, but the certification hurdles would be difference. The most complex thing usually isn't which FAR's you comply with, but how you demonstrate compliance. FBW would require quite different compliance demonstrations for certain failure modes than cable controls.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
If Boeing had been first to introduce FBW on the 737 Classic, could they have leveraged as much of the 737 Jurassic's certification and FARs?

Probably not as much, no.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 193):
And what impact or influence did EASA and the ICAO have? Were they required to rubber-stamp the FAA's certification of the 737 Classic, or could they have required additional certification work?

As Pihero correctly pointed out, EASA wasn't around and ICAO has no power over that kind of thing. But EASA's precursors (JAA and the member regulatory bodies) are not required to rubber-stamp anything, they can levy an requirements above/over/sideways from each other. For obvious reasons, they try to get along and respect each others' ruling, but they don't always do that.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-05 16:12:38 and read 13492 times.

Tom,
Thanks for a comprehensive explanation.
In this paragraph you wrote, what would be the relevant FAR as I've always been lost in the maze of those certification regs ?

Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 195):
The most complex thing usually isn't which FAR's you comply with, but how you demonstrate compliance. FBW would require quite different compliance demonstrations for certain failure modes than cable controls.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-05 17:51:16 and read 13412 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 194):
Remember, I'm only talking *performance* in this discussion...

Understood. But I admit to being confused by which metrics we are discussing when we say "performance".

I've read what packsonflight said about Amendment 25-42, which if I understand it correctly, means the A320 needed to be able to stop harder from higher speeds during an RTO then the 737 Classic did. So I would imagine this means the A320 needed a larger braking system under Amendment 25-42 than it would have needed if it has not been required to meet the Amendment 25-42 rules. We're there other structural-related changes that would have made the A320-100 heavier than she could have been if Amendment 25-42 did not exist?

And would that weight have adversely affected her performance vis-a-vis the 737-400, especially once the A320-200 entered service?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: tdscanuck
Posted 2010-12-05 18:34:52 and read 13364 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 196):
In this paragraph you wrote, what would be the relevant FAR as I've always been lost in the maze of those certification regs ?

There are quite a few, but a couple would be 25.145 (longitudinal control), 25.147 (directional and lateral control), 25.161 (trim), 25.231 (longitudinal stability & control), 25.233 (directional stability & control), 25.671 (Design & Construction - General), as well as any FAR that references "no single failure" and involves the flight controls.

The requirement for what you have to do doesn't change for these between FBW and non-FBW, but how you demonstrate that your design actually complies with the FAR may vary considerably.

Tom.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: rheinwaldner
Posted 2010-12-06 01:09:56 and read 13153 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 169):
come 2015, Boeing will be lucky to deliver one 777 and a dozen 737s a month because airlines will order 250 A350s and 1000 A320neos a year by then to support a 20 per month A350 delivery rate and an 80 per month A320neo delivery rate

Nobody said that.

B.t.w. you assume that there would be no 737NEO. Personally I consider that as unlikely now. IMO Boeing will be forced soon to bring at least the best possible NEO attempt.

But because all of you now pretend that Y1 would be announced soon and there would be NO 737NEO I will make the same assumption for the rest of my remarks!

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 170):
Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 164):
Announcing Y1 e.g. in 2011 could do more harm to 737NG sales than the A320NEO

So now Boeing shouldn't build new planes because it might jeopardize the meager number of sales they have left?

It happens after each announcement of a new design. Do you think buying 737's is as attractive once a minus 20% cost successor is firmly announced? After the commitement to the 787 the 767 hardly attracted anybody anymore (except the USAF).

Airlines buy aircraft for many reasons. But once the successor is forthcoming the second best predecessor will be bought only because of very rare reasons. 737NG orders will basically only happen for existing 737 operators and for immediate demand that strictly is needed for growth. But all who can will wait.

Thus overall NB sales volume will drop anyway, once Y1 is announced.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 171):
But even if it was so popular as to secure 75% of the annual orders for 150+ seat narrowbodies starting in 2011, I don't believe Airbus could actually deliver 75%.

They surely can because:

- The overall volume will be lower.

- Production capacity can be adjusted. No airframer would restrict production capacity if there is the potential to serve the market with consistently higher volumes.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 171):
With the planned production rate increases of 40 A320s and 35 737s per month, that is a combined total of 75 aircraft per month - or 900 a year.

To meet 75% of the demand, Airbus would need to increase capacity to 56 frames per month - an increase of forty percent. And that is not just Airbus needing to ramp up 40%, but all of their suppliers would have to ramp 40%. And the delivery system would need to increase by 40% to feed the parts into TLS and XFW. So that means more Belugas would need to be assembled along with increases in the other delivery systems Airbus uses.

All wrong because you assume the overall market for A320NEO and 737NG to be constant. But once Y1 is announced, Y1 will steal sales of those two aircrafts. And the bulk of lost orders will happen at the cost of the 737NG (because it is the weakest offering and because Y1 at first attracts those who prefer Boeing anyway).

The total order volume will be shared between 737NG, A320NEO AND Y1. Only that volume can be expected to be in the same ballpark as the current market is. Which forbids the conclusion that absolute A320NEO sales volume will increase at all. Airbus can (and will be happy) to maintain roughly the current order and production volumes when at the same time the 737 hype will calm down very strongly.

The A320NEO (in a world without 737NEO) is the ideal tool for Airbus to bridge the timespan until both A&B have introduced their new NB. During that timespan the A320NEO will generate the bulk of all sales for any of the older aircraft families and will provide Airbus with a steady and at least moderate income.

Boeing will have to bridge a much harder drop of deliveries.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 173):
Even without "good pricing" the 737s will nevertheless sell due to incremental orders from airlines with no Airbus NBs.

And, as Stitch clearly explained, there are limits to Airbus production that will turn some airlines to Boeing for earlier availability.

Yes, but earlier availability will be the only trump of the 737 anymore. And this will never sustain the current order and production volumes.

Quoting mdword1959 (Reply 175):
Quote:
"...This will be the first time in history where the same generation airplane will be replacing itself," said Wainshal. He calls the NEO a "half-way measure" that he predicts will be eclipsed by Boeing with a 737NG replacement model.

No:
1) This happens already now because today normal A320's are bought to replace early normal A320's.

2) The A320NEO is improved enough to be counted as a newer generation than the first A320's.

3) The A320NEO does not improve less than the 737 Classics did.

Of course Y1 will eclipse any A320 version. Y1 will exist for no other reason eventually. But in the meantime the A320NEO will proove as excellent stronghold to milk one of the older generation aircraft the most.

Quoting planemaker (Reply 178):
A shift, yes, but there can be no "exodus" because of production limitations... and the fact that if Boeing does not "NEO", an all-new 737 will be around the corner in 3-4 years from A320 NEO EIS... and possibly as early as 2018.

Even in a world without Airbus there would be an exodus away from the 737 under your conditions. Towards Y1. Most airlines will no longer order 737's in 2015.

In a world with the A320NEO even more pressure will be on the 737NG.

The pattern that we can expect the most is already present in a constellation of the past:

----- Look at the story of 767, A330 and 787. Now put in 737NG, A320NEO and Y1.

Even the efficiency gains are similar:

767 -- > 20% fuel burn gains -- > 787
787 -- > roughly 5%..10% better than -- > A330

Translates to:
737NG -- > 20% fuel burn gains -- > Y1
Y1 -- > roughly 5%..10% better than -- > A320NEO

I think the A320NEO would be well worth the effort if it can repeat the pattern of the A330 lifecycle.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 181):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 179):
The A320 launched during the 737 Classic's launch, so it is not like Boeing could just stop the Classic and start over. As is, within a bit more than a decade they responded with the 737NG and have held their own since.

Also the classic dominated the A32x series for many years. Again it took Airbus years and updates to bring the sales up.

But the classics were weak enough that Airbus could grow past their previous insignificance.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-06 02:29:17 and read 13080 times.

I think the interesting question is what engines will be available for the Boeing Y1, and what fuselage efficiency improvements that will render an improved A320 obsolete, within 10 years. Since march I've been working with Henry (Kaktusdigital) on and off on a concept, ERC-20. Maybe we can reanimate & publish this Xmas holidays.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: brendows
Posted 2010-12-06 04:06:25 and read 12939 times.

Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 199):
It happens after each announcement of a new design. Do you think buying 737's is as attractive once a minus 20% cost successor is firmly announced? After the commitement to the 787 the 767 hardly attracted anybody anymore (except the USAF).

I'd say that the 767 didn't attract many new orders even before the 787 was announced because it already was close to the end of its life cycle. How attractive an old alternative is depends on the time horizon, there will always be those who need a machine before the new alternative is available.

Quoting keesje (Reply 200):
I think the interesting question is what engines will be available for the Boeing Y1, and what fuselage efficiency improvements that will render an improved A320 obsolete, within 10 years.

I don't see any major changes in fuselage efficiency in terms of weight reductions. Even with a move to new materials, the weight advantage on a small airliner will be minimal (the advantage will be in maintenance cost). I'd say that the biggest advantage can come in improved wing efficiency. But will it render a A320NEO obsolete? I doubt that, just as much as a A320NEO will render the 737NG obsolete.
I'll leave it up to Lightsaber to give us his visions on the engine front  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Asiaflyer
Posted 2010-12-06 04:58:13 and read 12918 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 171):
To meet 75% of the demand, Airbus would need to increase capacity to 56 frames per month - an increase of forty percent. And that is not just Airbus needing to ramp up 40%, but all of their suppliers would have to ramp 40%. And the delivery system would need to increase by 40% to feed the parts into TLS and XFW. So that means more Belugas would need to be assembled along with increases in the other delivery systems Airbus uses.


Which planet do you live on? 40% growth over some years is no problems to deal with. Plenty of large companies (including the one I work for) are planning to double its sales globally over coming five years.
For Asia Pacific area, many are expecting to triple or quadruple sales.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 176):
Yes, but that means Airbus can only continue to deliver around 40 planes a month and therefore Boeing should see stable demand for the 737 to continue to support their own 35-40 frame per month delivery schedule and therefore Boeing is both not "knocked out of the market" and they don't have to invest in their own neo program.


Airbus will not continue to deliver 40/month if market responds well to A320Neo. The optimal production rate will be much higher if demand is good, without diluting profitability.

Remember that if you stand still, you are actually going backwards, because your competitors are going forward.
GM, Chrysler and Ford forgot that.
Boeing soon has to make a move as well.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-06 05:46:02 and read 12851 times.

Perhaps the decision to launch the NEO is right and indeed a potental decision for Boeing to follow (with a slightly lower bypass version) is right too.Why because as they have both said all along - that the real breakthroughs necessary for a game changing narrowbody are not there yet.

I saw this article today and it made me think.Both A&B are learning how to build composite aircraft and importantly all composite wings.They are both doing this (787/350) with "conventional" designs.But when they have learnt this - the next step would perhaps be to apply those learnings to an "unconventional" design.Of course they need to wait on engine breakthroughs as well.But perhaps the sort of work shown here is the way a real breakthrough will become possible vis a vie fuel consumption.

http://www.livescience.com/technology/bird-like-airplane-101121.html

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Stitch
Posted 2010-12-06 07:55:35 and read 12743 times.

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 202):
Which planet do you live on? 40% growth over some years is no problems to deal with. Plenty of large companies (including the one I work for) are planning to double its sales globally over coming five years.

It's one thing to double the production rate of a consumer electronics item like an iPad.

It's quite another to double the production rate of a complex machine like a commercial airliner.

I mean if it was so damn easy, why didn't Boeing and Airbus increase production to 50 frames during the order boom last decade? That level of demand was certainly there.

[Edited 2010-12-06 08:16:22]

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: RoseFlyer
Posted 2010-12-06 08:20:56 and read 12707 times.

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 202):

Airbus will not continue to deliver 40/month if market responds well to A320Neo. The optimal production rate will be much higher if demand is good, without diluting profitability.

It doesn't matter how good your airplane is, recessions will hit and cause demand to go down. Orders will fall and airlines will defer deliveries in bad times. Increasing production rates too fast can be a very bad thing. When the recession after 9/11 hit, Boeing decreased 737NG production rate by 40%. That involved massive layoffs and extreme capital expenditure as they were building white tail airplanes with no customers. Not only was it a huge financial blow, but the blow to morale as thousands of people were laid off was also bad for the company. Not only was it the people assembling the airplanes, but the engineers and other staff to support production also got hit hard with layoffs.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: art
Posted 2010-12-06 08:38:25 and read 12656 times.

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 202):
Airbus will not continue to deliver 40/month if market responds well to A320Neo. The optimal production rate will be much higher if demand is good, without diluting profitability.

I appreciate that the whole supply chain has to ramp up for production to increase but in terms of assembly capacity, is the Tianjin plant not designed to allow assembly of far more than 4 per month?

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-06 09:16:52 and read 12601 times.

Both Boeing and Airbus limit production to limit their liabilities when the next downturn comes. They both want a steady, well trained and reliable work force over the long term...one that can be sustained in the bad times as well as good.

If you plan only for the good times, then you end up with significant financial liabilities when sales go down, and you lose the investment made in training and the workers themselves, who might not be available when the next upturn comes. The infrastructure that goes along with it will then sit idle, still incurring fixed expenses during the down times without any income to offset the expenses.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: astuteman
Posted 2010-12-06 09:33:42 and read 12571 times.

[

Quoting brendows (Reply 201):
But will it render a A320NEO obsolete? I doubt that, just as much as a A320NEO will render the 737NG obsolete.

That's about as exciting as I think it gets, too

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 202):
Which planet do you live on? 40% growth over some years is no problems to deal with. Plenty of large companies (including the one I work for) are planning to double its sales globally over coming five years.

Whilst I don't disagree, I think airframers and their suppliers will be extremely cautious of spending billions on capital investment straight into the next downturn in orders.
And the swings in the airliner orderinig cycle are viscious   

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 207):
Both Boeing and Airbus limit production to limit their liabilities when the next downturn comes

  
Rate increases will only come on the back of a growing, secure long-term backlog

rgds

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Pihero
Posted 2010-12-06 10:05:06 and read 12528 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 197):
Amendment 25-42, which if I understand it correctly, means the A320 needed to be able to stop harder from higher speeds during an RTO then the 737 Classic did.

Boy, you've hardly scratched the surface of those performance penalties !
Let's just say in very simple terms that, on short(-ish) or hot (-ish) climates or at high(-ish) airport altitudes, the new A320 performed less well than its 25 year-old counterpart : Significant drop in offered traffic loads...etc... etc...
You have here one of the reasons why the 73 was so well received by the LoCos in Europe and elsewhere (the USA aside, for other reasons).

Quoting Stitch (Reply 197):
We're there other structural-related changes that would have made the A320-100 heavier than she could have been if Amendment 25-42 did not exist?

the 320 had been structurally beefed-up in order to comply with new requirements, which were not applicable to the *Classic* by virtue of the grandfather's rights.
The same could be seen now on the 788,obviously on a post 25-42 certification, with an OEW a full 20 tons heavier than the 737ER it is to replace (granted, the extra 1675 Nm will require some strengthening and some tankage, but twenty tons?
The 734 flew in February 1988 and the performance gap was glaring. It was in response to the outcries and the demands of the Europeans and Canadians that the FAA and the JAA met in January 1990 for a revision of the airworthiness standards (Mainly performance ).
The JAA document came out in July 1992, the FAA one, which was essentially similar in August 1993.
The new set of rules became applicable in 1998, a full ten years after the 734 first flight.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: JoeCanuck
Posted 2010-12-06 11:37:02 and read 12428 times.

Quoting Pihero (Reply 209):

Not to be negative since much of this is interesting but it really doesn't have much effect on any NEO prospects.

Since its inception, Airbus has sold thousands of A320's and it looks like it didn't hurt them very much. Everyone can agree that regardless of any inequities that occurred during the Classic era, the field was level since the NG.

Whether or not the field will continue to be level with the introduction of the NEO is to be seen.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Tangowhisky
Posted 2010-12-06 12:06:36 and read 12394 times.

Quoting JoeCanuck (Reply 210):
Since its inception, Airbus has sold thousands of A320's and it looks like it didn't hurt them very much. Everyone can agree that regardless of any inequities that occurred during the Classic era, the field was level since the NG.

You are right. But this gives them an opportunity to even have a better family of aircraft. I think the NEO is a shot at the bow of the Cseries, but more importantly they are after the 757 replacement with an A321neo. It is all about winning more Boeing customers, and launching heavy wakes to the Cseries.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Asiaflyer
Posted 2010-12-06 16:44:41 and read 12211 times.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 204):
I mean if it was so damn easy, why didn't Boeing and Airbus increase production to 50 frames during the order boom last decade? That level of demand was certainly there.

Isn't that what Boeing is considering now by increasing 777 production from 7 to 10 frames/month, i.e. +42%?
Havn't seen many people arguing about that.

I'm not saying that Airbus should increase production by 40%, but if demand is there, they certainly will increase output and it is for sure doable.  

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: flash330
Posted 2010-12-06 17:06:04 and read 12179 times.

If i was Airbus i'd rather regret putting new engines on the A320 than regret not doing it. much easier to cancel a program no wants then conjure one everyone wants out of thin air

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: XT6Wagon
Posted 2010-12-07 07:00:26 and read 11978 times.

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 202):
Which planet do you live on? 40% growth over some years is no problems to deal with. Plenty of large companies (including the one I work for) are planning to double its sales globally over coming five years.
For Asia Pacific area, many are expecting to triple or quadruple sales.

It takes between 1 and 3 years to get a part from the time its ordered to the time its delivered. This is why rate increases are so far out of the anouncement date. Even if your suppliers can make the extra parts without any capital investment (extra lead time), they will start a part up the chain today and deliver it far in the future. It takes quite a while for the extra raw ingots of aluminum or titanium to be made, shipped, and arrive. Then it needs to be cast, forged or rolled into shape. This shape then needs to be machined. perhaps chemical milling. Quality control at all these steps adds time. Possible shipping between contractors in each step. We haven't even started assembly into one of the many subassemblies.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: Scipio
Posted 2010-12-12 16:03:41 and read 11495 times.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 38):
According to Airbus "The A320neo will have over 95 percent airframe commonality with the standard A320 Family"
So there is just 5% those fleet managers can play with... It's more a matter of take it or leave it IMHO. In this case, not such a bad decision by Airbus. Don't forget the current engines will remain available for the A320 family side by side with the NEO. You don't want too many differences in the airframes themselves then.
Quoting keesje (Reply 39):
A few months ago Air France said they need an extra effort to to improve the A320 NEO.

- 10% to 14% better direct exploitation costs,
- wing improvements,
- weight reductions and
- drag reduction.
- EIS 2015/16.

A thought: the fact that the differences between OEO and NEO will be kept minimal does not mean that there will be no further improvements that are common to both. These may include further weight and drag reductions, as well as wing tweaks (the technology for this is available after all the efforts Airbus has pumped in A380 and A350 wing design).

Boeing keeps on finding ways to introduce small improvements to its B737, and there is no reason why Airbus could not do the same--including ongoing improvements to the OEO engine offerings.

With such additional improvements, we could still end up with a 2016 A320NEO that has 10+ % better direct operating costs than a 2010 A320, along with a 2016 A320OEO offering a 3-5% improvement.

In any case, if Airbus wants to keep the A320 in production until 2025, it will have little choice but to keep on finding further improvements.

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: mffoda
Posted 2010-12-13 08:34:02 and read 11273 times.

Ryanair is not thrilled with A320NEO.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ir-not-grabbed-by-the-a320neo.html

Quote:

Airbus' decision to launch the A320NEO has "put the ball right into Boeing's court".

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: keesje
Posted 2010-12-13 08:45:15 and read 11234 times.

Quoting mffoda (Reply 216):

Ryanair is not thrilled with A320NEO.....

From the interview

Millar describes this as a "very interesting development", but he believes the timeframe is "lengthy" and that the money would be better spent on an all-new successor rather than an intermediate step.

"We think this is an awful lot to ask the manufacturers to deliver in this time period and to us, as an outsider, it looks very aggressive."


I wonder if Millar thinks 2016 for A320 NEO is lengthy or very aggressive..

Topic: RE: Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)
Username: parapente
Posted 2010-12-13 10:29:42 and read 11144 times.

He clearly feels that it is aggressive - with everything else going on.I don't know why he says this really.The only aggressive part has nothing to do with Airbus - it is whether this brand new engine can be delivered to such a tight timetable -no? The rest is "trivial" in comparison I feel.

And yes - since they are 737 users they will want Boeing to respond.The idea that either a new engine or indeed a new aircraft would somehow be cheaper is just silly.You pay for improvements - period.

The maths is very simple - either the extra one pays for the improved aircraft saves money over the lifetime of the aircraft or it does not.If it were the latter no one would buy (or make) it. So clearly it will do.

They have just had the chance to buy the "old" aircraft cheaply and have walked away from the deal - that is their perogative of course.It suggests that they would like whatever the new one is I guess. Southwest have at least been open about this.

Roll on Jan I feel!


The messages in this discussion express the views of the author of the message, not necessarily the views of Airliners.net or any entity associated with Airliners.net.

Copyright © Lundgren Aerospace. All rights reserved.
http://www.airliners.net/