AvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2445 posts, RR: 9 Posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 5158 times:
From the 3/11-17 issue of Flight International, page 8:
Airbus is looking at several long-term concepts for countering Boeing's proposed new 7E7-300X/400X, but with current thinking focused on replacing today's shorter-range A300/A310 family of aircraft, it may challenge Boeing at the opposite end if the future medium-size aircraft market.
The European manufacturer is stressing that any new development will come after the A380 ultra-large-airliner, which is due to enter service in early 2006, while near-term efforts are focused on putting the delayed A340-500 and A318 derivatives into service this year. Industry sources say it would be 2010 before Airbus could field a new 220- to 250-seat successor to the A310/A330, which has been tentatively designated the A305.
Boeing is initially focussing on developing a family of long-range aircraft, the 14,430km (7800nm) range 7E7-300X and 13,320km-range -400X stretch, seating 228 and 268 passengers, respectively. The U.S. manufacturer surveyed potential airline operators shortly before the 7E7 was officially announced and found two different camps: those needing an aircraft in the 11,000-14,800km range and another seeking around a 7400km performance.
It is understood the A305, while roughly similar in seat size to the 7E7-300X, would initially be designed to address the latter group of carriers. Airbus's strategy in the longer term, suggest the sources, would be to grow and possibly rewing the aircraft as a future replacement for the 10,360-11,840km range A330-200/300, which in its' current form will face stiff competition from the 7E7's promised extra range and better economics. Boeing's dilemma will be to either shrink the range of the 7E7 or convince carriers to misuse the aircraft over shorter distances.
Boeing is months away from defining the 7E7 and so far concedes only that "there will be two body lengths". According to Mike Bair, vice-president for Boeing's 7E7 program, "We're not done with the definition yet though already we think that Lufthansa would use it inside Europe, if they buy it, while others will take it across the Pacific".
AC340 From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 337 posts, RR: 0 Reply 3, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 4971 times:
Can Airbus even afford another R&D program right now? They are going to have to compete with the 7E7 (assuming it ever gets beyond the planning stages) eventually. I think they are going to have to start to recover some of the 15 billion they invested into the A380 before they can undertake something as loft and ambitious as a new design.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16308 posts, RR: 87 Reply 4, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 4896 times:
Well, arguably it won't be an "all new" design.
It will hopefully be a family of aircraft, this time spanning all the way from the A310 size to the A330-300 size and perhaps just a tidge longer.
It will likely use the same fuselage as the A3[00,10,30,40], and will incorporate technologies from the A318, A340-500/600, and A380.
I certainly hope they offer two wings... which they also do now with the A340.
Airbus has a distinct advantage in that they could end up with a better family of aircraft than Boeing, with less time. By introducing an A305, then an A315, then retooling the A330-200 and -300 with all the improvements, they could have a broader scope of aircraft.
Not that I don't think the 7E7 will be great - I do. But Airbus is better at familying.
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 5, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4767 times:
It's not because Airbus is better at "familying". It's because they were the new comer. They started their A320/330/340 family within a three-year span. Then, of course they have a more current family than Boeing has. Boeing can only replace their current offerings when resources allow them to and the right time comes along. If twenty years from now, Airbus still has a more current family than Boeing, then your statement would be valid. The 7E7 and 777 will likely make the 330/340 family obsolete. By then, Airbus will have a huge hole between the 320 and 380. Airbus will need to develop two sub-families to meet the competition. Then Boeing can attack on the narrowbody front which in turn will force Airbus to work on the A320 replacement. Can Airbus afford to do three families right after they just completed the A380? If they can't, then their family might not look as rosy as they do now.
Sinlock From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1560 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (10 years 9 months 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 4723 times:
Boeing has 20 years of new ideas and technology to put in to its 767 replacement. And has learned a lot of things from Airbus's ideas.
My question is, In a span of 2 to 3 years how could Airbus build and aircraft that will truly put it ahead of 7E7? Even if they can do this, it will not be by a large amount maybe 1-2% but that is not large enough to be a "7E7 Killer"
My thoughts would to be revamp the 330 as best as I could and stop-gap Boeing with whole Airbus package. It worked the first time it might work again.
(In the end I don't care what planes the airlines buy, I'll be there to fix them)
BWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2 Reply 8, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 4586 times:
Airbus has an advantage as Boeing is trying to take aways this market or get a bigger piece of the pie in this segment.
To me this is what Boeing need to do.
7E7 and the 777 have flight deck commonality and improve on what Airbus has doen with the 330/340 family. They should also look at making the aircraft as a suitable replacement for the 300/310 family.
Look at the merging the 757 with the 737 family. Give it little bit more cargo space and have commonality with the 777 and 7E7.
Look at what Airbus did not get to right with the 380 and launch the 747NG which will aslo have flight deck commonality with the rest of the Boeing products as mentioned previously.
This can be done between the next 10- 15 years. Given the success of the 777, if the 7E7 follows suit Boeing will have a winner. Its not now about creating a direct competitor what Boeing has to do is raise the bar in terms of operating efficentcy and use...
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4486 times:
I don't expect Airbus will just sit & wait what happens when the 7E7 arrives in 2009. A330 will be improved.
A330 will probably still be a little bigger, cheaper, carry a lot more cargo, have commonality with A318-A380.
The fact 7E7 will fly a little further won't convince airline to switch to 7E7's (almost all airlines in need have probably bought the A330 already by then..). This is only relevant for a very limited number of citypairs in the 200/250 segment.
Boeing 7E7 going head to head with A330 will dramaticly reduce profit margins and push up 7E7 break-even above ... say 400-600 ?
I still have a slight hope Boeing will be corrected in time by the airlines & will go for a short / medium haul variant first.
Mf3864 From United States of America, joined May 2002, 118 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4424 times:
I see a lot of talk about A300/310 replacements. I thought the A330 family was the replacement? No? According to the Airbus website it is. To a neophyte they seem like they are similar size, twin-aisle twinjet.
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1845 posts, RR: 8 Reply 14, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 21 hours ago) and read 4383 times:
If FBW is such an important family feature for Airbus, then try to explain why about 15-20 of the current 320/330/340, such as AF, AZ, UA, KE, OZ, CZ, CX, SQ, MH, TG, KL, BA, MS, EK, BR, NH, VN, have also ordered the 777? That's about half of the 777 customers. Pilot training is cost, but it is a one-time cost. The recurring cost of operating an airplane day in and day out is a more important driver. If you think an airline will overlook a more efficient plane simply to save pilot training cost, then you are being way too naive.
RayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 5 Reply 16, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4330 times:
I think what Airbus will end up doing is the following:
Use the current A300B4-600 and A310-300 fuselage designs, but incorporate a new, lower-drag wing and install the latest-technology high-bypass engines. By using an all-new wing design, the result is that the wing can be much lighter than the A330-200 wing, but its aerodynamic design will allow Mach 0.86 ecnomical cruising speeds.
Teahan From Belgium, joined Nov 1999, 5275 posts, RR: 62 Reply 19, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 4300 times:
I highly doubt Airbus will only upgrade its A330 family. It would simply be a situation like the B747X vs the A380 or even the B767-400ER vs the A330-200 with only the newer product managing decent sales. Well that is if (and a big IF) the 7E7 lives up to its current promises.
My feeling (and nothing more) is that Airbus will launch a brand new product (as is mentioned in the article) and that it will form the basis of an A330-200, A330-300, A340-200 and A340-300 replacement. While I am sure it is sooner than Airbus would have wanted to, does it really have much of a choice?
Airbus could also hit with a non-traditional aircraft and blow the 7E7 out of the water but that is unlikely.
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
Teahan From Belgium, joined Nov 1999, 5275 posts, RR: 62 Reply 21, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4284 times:
Airbus knows that the longer range 7E7 is aiming for a market for which there isn't much demand. They'll make their first plane serve the shorter range market.
Well I am not so sure about that. IF (and at such an early stage, it really is a big IF) the 7E7 lives up to its current promises (efficiency and such), it will certainly act as a replacement to everything up to the size of the A340-300. While it will have transpacific range, I am sure it will be perfectly suitable as an A330-200/300 replacement.
The question is if there is really demand for a 7E7 type plane with a much shorter range? What are you suggesting, 6000-8000km?
[Edited 2003-03-13 23:29:39]
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
Racko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4851 posts, RR: 20 Reply 22, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4278 times:
I think this depends much on the development of the airline business, if it recovers by 2004 or 2005 and their sales go up, I could imagine Airbus going for a completly new design, maybe even a revolutionary design. If the economy continues to slump, they'll update the A300 & A332 with a new wing.
Racko From Germany, joined Nov 2001, 4851 posts, RR: 20 Reply 24, posted (10 years 9 months 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 4274 times:
"And I used FBW because it normalizes the handling of the entire family of aircraft."
That's it. Because the A320/A330/A340/(probably)A380 all handle quite similar thanks to FBW & Auto-trim, pilots can have type-ratings for the all types simultaneously and the cross-qualification takes just a few days. It's not a one-time cost, pilots being able to fly everything from 100-555 seats add great flexibility.
25 Sllevin: To think that there's not going to be a 7E7 market is to assume that all the current 752/753/762/763 operators are not going to look to eventually rep
26 Teahan: Gigneil, Yes. According to the article, there are airlines that want a shorter range derivative, 7400 kms or so. This is all the A300 and A310 custome
27 Teahan: Racko, If the economy continues to slump, they'll update the A300 & A332 with a new wing. Well will it be competitive? As I mentioned above, I fear it
28 Dynkrisolo: Find me a major airline that pool their 320 pilots with their 330/340 pilots. The nature of the pilot profession simply does not permit pooling pilots
29 Teahan: Dynkrisolo, There's only a single airline I can think of, Swissair. A32S and A330-200. I presume Swiss International Air Lines also do it but I guess
30 Gigneil: Austrian does as well, as does Qatar. I wouldn't say its in the nature of the pilot profession, but you might be right. I think pilots would enjoy a f
31 Racko: I guess with a new wing and up-to-date engines, it could come close to the performance of the 7E(ight?)7, while not matching it. Together with the com
32 Racko: Pilots flying different types are not a very big issue between short-haul and long-haul planes, however with a possible short-haul widebody it will be
33 UN_B732: Many Airlines cry for a modern replacement in the A310 region. They can get a bit more with the 767/A330. But not as little as on the A310 with that r
34 BA: The A330-200 is much bigger than the A300 That's not really true. The A330-200 is bigger. But they are still very similar in size. In terms of capabil
35 Clickhappy: for me it doesn't really come down to which product is slightly better. In the next 10 years all of the American majors are going to be replacing 762'
36 Gigneil: It doesn't sound like a monster 8000 nm plane IS being targeted at 762s, 752s, and some 763s. The plane will be the size of 763, and have 2000 nm more
37 Teahan: Gigneil, The plane will be the size of 763, and have 2000 nm more range. Its being targeted at people that want to fly KUL-JFK with a 220 seat plane.
38 Dynkrisolo: Absolutely amazing! So some of you must be constantly taking note what each airline wants, while Boeing is in their dreamworld dreaming up some planes
39 Indianguy: I frankly couldn’t understand the reasoning behind the 7E7 in the first place. Isnt it rather close to the 767/777? Would’nt re-engining the 767
40 Teahan: I frankly couldn’t understand the reasoning behind the 7E7 in the first place. Isnt it rather close to the 767/777? Would’nt re-engining t
41 ConcordeBoy: Would’nt re-engining the 767 and installing a new cockpit and avionics to provide commonality with the 777 be more economical instead of launching a
42 BA: IMHO it will be also be clear A340-300 replacement. 777-200ER is the A340-300's competitor. The 7E7 will be considerably smaller even though that rend
43 BA: It's true that this aircraft does indeed have considerably more range than the 767 series. However, I think there is a good reason for this. Long-haul
44 9V-SVC: Interesting article . I love all these competition . More great planes to come from both manufacturers .
45 Teahan: BA, 777-200ER is the A340-300's competitor. The 7E7 will be considerably smaller even though that rendering makes it big. Unless they come out with a
46 Teahan: My key question is what will the future of the 757 be. I find the 7E7 to be too large and too heavy to replace the 757. Perhaps the 757 itself will be
47 Gigneil: Dynkrisolo- Yes, actually, I'm trying to say I think Boeing might be designing in a vacuum on this one, just like some of their future stillborn plane
48 BA: Teahan, 268 seats in a 3-class configuration is damn close to the A340-300 (10% less than Airbus' suggested thee class). The A340-300 seats 295 passen
49 Yyz717: Nor do I see satisfied airlines looking to replacing there 13-year A340-300s...... I do. Alot of airlines roll their fleets over quickly, with some ai
50 BA: Examples includes SQ, EK, SW. Yes, and those are very few exceptions. Most airlines that bought passenger MD-11's in the early 90's have now retired t
51 Cloudy: Yes, actually, I'm trying to say I think Boeing might be designing in a vacuum on this one, just like some of their future stillborn planes. Its not u
52 Teahan: BA, The A340-300 seats 295 passengers in a typical 3-class layout. That's very close to the 777's 301 passengers in a typical 3-class layout. 268 is s
53 Dynkrisolo: Gigneil: You don't know what has been going on behind the closed door. I can assure you Boeing is not designing in the vacuum. It's you who have the h
54 Leelasit: Refer to the question: Find me a major airline that pool their 320 pilots with their 330/340 pilots. I think AC does.
55 Gigneil: Dynkrisolo- You're twisting my words. I didn't say nobody needed the range, I said it probably wasn't the best possible choice for the first plane. I
56 Hamlet69: "By 2010 it [a hypothetical new A330] will be cheaper then the new 7E7 compensating styate of the art 7E7 advantages." Are you serious? Sorry, but if
57 ConcordeBoy: should have 777-type rating, with cockpit commonality with 737NG Forgive the ignorance, but how exactly is/could this be done?
58 Hamlet69: ConcordeBoy, The 737NG actually has a fairly modern cockpit. Also, like the 767-400ER, it is 'programmable' to function either like a 737 Classic cock
59 Racko: Hamlet, You can hold a type-rating for the A320,A330 and A340 at the same time, something you can't with the 737NG & 777. That's what makes them more
60 Hamlet69: Racko, Don't get me wrong. Airbus has clearly done a better job on their 'family' concept than Boeing up to this date. Indeed, I never said the 737NG
61 Ha763: Actually, I believe only the 757/767 have a common type-rating and the A330/A340 have a similar type-rating because of the difference in the number of
62 Gigneil: The A330/A340 are the same endorsement. They are not separate ratings. N