BoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1595 posts, RR: 18 Posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11583 times:
Hi Folks... It seems like Boeing is off to spectacular start with the 7E7 and once the bird flies and IF Boeing meets all the performance targets is going to be a table turner... And advantage will be Boeing, by far...
What will Airbus introduce or offer to compete with 7E7, which according to Boeing and many others that this aircraft (as of today) is going to incorporate a lot new technology such as composite fuselage, bleedless engines, for the most part an "electric plane", etc... It seems like the 7E7 is much more than just a efficient bleedless engine, so Airbus statements that they are simply going to hang those engines on A330 seems to me just inadequate.
Boeing has many years experience which Airbus does not and a lot is from Defense contracts. Does Airbus have the "know how" to come up with an aircraft to compete with Boeing within 10 years? Otherwise, it seems like Airbus will lose a substantial number of their A300/10, 332, and a large 767 market. Unless the A380 becomes a cash cow, how are they going to afford this?
My main points are: your take on this and if you agree or not that Airbus will offer a competing model in an acceptable time frame?
Please avoid comparing Boeing strategies to Airbus... I am just currius to know what options Airbus has - now that Boeing seens to have succeeded in their business plan in this huge segment.... and to me this is much more important than the A380.
WhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 2, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11548 times:
Airbus has the experience of several European defence contractors to draw upon. BAe and Aerospatiale are just two of them.
Expect Airbus to counter the 7E7 with a proposal of their own, just like two sides in a chess game.
If aviation was just a one-sided affair, things would quickly stagnate. The dominant producer would dictate pricing and be sluggish to improve. Two equally balanced competitors is like watching two wrestlers in the WWF ring (sh*t...what an awful example!) constantly looking for that weakness they can exploit in the other.
Now that the finest producer of airliners is no longer with us (fly DC Jets!) we are left with Airbus (the young upstart with fine products, almost the Lexus of the clouds!) and Boeing (the Rolls Royce of the skies) tussling for market share.
It encourages innovation and refinement! Let's hope it stays that way!
ACAfan From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 709 posts, RR: 6 Reply 3, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11548 times:
They dont need to compete against the 7E7. The 330 is a fine aircraft. If they can reduce costs on the 330 even a fraction of the proposed 7E7 savings, the 330 will hold its niche, as the costs are spread over a larger number of passengers.
Freddie Laker ... May be at peace with his maker ... But he is a persona non grata ... with IATA
WhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 4, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 11535 times:
Ther 7E7 should be the prod in the ribs Airbus needs to improve the A330, and produce an even more efficient variant. Let's see the A330 with the GENX and Trent 1000, together with the systems refinements needed to carry those engines.
YUL332LX From Canada, joined Feb 2004, 820 posts, RR: 1 Reply 6, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 11475 times:
If you mean ten years from now, you can bet that Airbus will come up with a whole new plane incorporating all the 7E7 improvements and probably more.
In the meantime though, Airbus will try to position the 332 as a proven plane (while the 7E7 is not) and probably put much emphasis on the commonality of the 332 with the other airbus products. It might work for a while but I don’t see Airbus selling hundreds of 332 in years to come.
The 332 probably has a better future as a cargo a/c in the next decade.
E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 846 posts, RR: 51 Reply 8, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 11446 times:
If they can reduce costs on the 330 even a fraction of the proposed 7E7 savings, the 330 will hold its niche, as the costs are spread over a larger number of passengers.
Only for the A330-300, with which the 7E7 will never compete with in the first place. The A333 is a 772A competitor. And, the 7E7-9 is slightly larger than the A332, so this argument is rather moot.
The A330 is doing fine, look at the MU 30 aircraft order yesterday.
This order was for A333s, ASAIK, again not a 7E7 competitor. Airbus will continue to gain orders from exisiting A330 customers who want to complete thier existing fleets rather than add a new fleet type. The more important issue is new customers (such as the SQ battle) with which Airbus will be hard pressed to compete with the 7E7.
Let's see the A330 with the GENX and Trent 1000, together with the systems refinements needed to carry those engines.
For now, these two engines are bleedless and they are not compatible with the systems onboard the A330. Rolls Royce said "no" to an upgraded Trent 700, saying it would be better for Airbus to work around the Trent 1000 or "commercialize" the Trent 1000. RR might make a bleed air version of the engine for Airbus, but nothing is set in stone.
Problem with bleedless engines is the cost of reengineering the airframe to be compatible with the engine is not likely justified by the improved economics.
Expect Airbus to counter the 7E7 with a proposal of their own, just like two sides in a chess game.
Airbus should first introduce an A320 replacement that features a narrow-widebody configuration. It would seat 2+2+2, with variants seating 220, 180, and 140, with 3500nm range. Then Airbus would follow up with an all-new heavy twin, that replaces the A340 family and A330 family with a singe airframe. The first being a 260 seater with 8500nm range, the second being a 310 seater with 8000nm range, and the third being a 360 seater with 8000nm range.
Md80fanatic From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 2651 posts, RR: 10 Reply 11, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 11391 times:
They will build more large aircraft that for some reason cannot use existing infrastructure. I wonder what possessed engineers to depart from that hard/cold rule anyway? What would we think of Chysler if they started making a car that NEEDED larger roadways on which to travel? I like the 380 but hey....make 'em to fit what we already got, period. What do they think, money grows on trees?
The above is my personal opinion and it is not meant to be the catalyst of another silly A vs B argument.
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 846 posts, RR: 51 Reply 12, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 11383 times:
Your are basically saying that Airbus will have to come up with new type if it seriously wants to compete with the 7e7.
Basically, yes. To match the 7E7, the A332 must trim several tons of weight, add 2,000nm of range, and reduce fuel burn by a good 15-20%. With all the radical technologies in the 7E7, they can't simply gut the A330 and build an NG like the 737. They can hold onto some market with an NG, but not hold ground against the 7E7.
Can someone exlpain to me this thing about bleedless engines.
All existing engines sap an amount of air out of the compressor to drive turbines that themselves drive the hydraulic, electric, and air conditioning units of the aircraft. This 'bleed-air' can be quite a lot for large aircraft, and basically, it is air that is not working to propell the aircraft. Also, the engines must always be run at a certin level to maintain the bleed-air supply for the aircraft systems, lest the APU require power-up.
By eliminating the need for bleed-air, all thrust generated by the engine goes to propelling the aircraft. The engines do not need to maintain a certin thrust level, and can be run at whatever rate is efficent. Since all systems would become electrical, the APU can merely be a JetA1 powered generator. All the heavy duct-work that routes the red-hot bleed air to the turbines is eliminated. The aircraft becomes electrical not mechanical.
This is great for a newly designed aircraft, but trying to modify an existing aircraft into a bleedless aircraft is easier said than done. You basically have to redesign every system on the aircraft...
BWIA 772 From Barbados, joined May 2002, 2200 posts, RR: 2 Reply 13, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 11256 times:
DFW thanks for the explanation i have gotten the general idea so now when anyone in my family talks about planes I can come across as a real knowledgeable aviation fan
The 7e7 seems to be a promising aircraft Boeing is heading in a completely direction than airbus lets hope that they are right which I am sure they will be.
All though that I am really looking forward to the 7e7 success and how 7e7 technology will be used to shape a 737 and even a 747 replacement.
AeroOzzie From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 55 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 11213 times:
By building an A300/A310 replacement. It's become blatantly obvious now that the A332 is too capable (i.e. heavy and large) an aircraft to replace the A300/A310/762/763 class of aircraft and with the seemingly far more efficient 7E7-9 now competing sizewise with the A332, Airbus are going to have to come up with a new design.
Any talk now of the A332Lite being able to compete pound for pound with the 7E7, or a non-need for a 7E7 competitor is simply marketing bullshit, and that's perfectly acceptable (just as Boeing has in the past said it doesn't see a viable market in the A380 size class yet every now and then you see another enlargened 747 redesign/upgrade/improvement being touted).
I won't be surprised to see a firm 7E7 competitor sized aircraft announced in 2006 around the time the first A380 enters service and the engineers can afford to concentrate more on a new aircraft. A market of some 2000 aircraft is too big for Airbus to ignore.
Target From Switzerland, joined Jun 2004, 1 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 11173 times:
I think the same modifications to the 7E7-Engines that Boeing is planning for use on the 747Adv (like Trent1000 with bleedair) could be used on the A330.
But what about the composites? I'm not sure how much this saves in weight.
isn't the main problem for Airbus, that the 7E7 is just a bargain when you think of how much technology it has at that comparably low price? If you compare A34X to B777 you can say that the B777 may be a bloody good airplane but it sure is very expensive.
How is it possible that Boeing can sell the 7E7 at almost the same price as a 767? Airbus must find the answer to that or they may lose some marketshare.....
Back to topic, if Airbus makes a successor to the A33X after A380, Boeing could start the same time on the B737-successor, so Airbus again on the defensive.
exciting times ahead and this time it seems that Airbus walks behind!
OK this is my first post on a.net but hopefully not the last
UA777222 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3348 posts, RR: 12 Reply 17, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 11098 times:
If what you are asking is how is the 380 going to put up with the 7e7. Well, if what they say will happen happens then orders should pick up quickly. I think it's just the fear of such a large a/c in such a low economy. OR If what your asking is that with the addition of this new a/c will Boeing out do Airbus on the numbers. Well with this addition they will also be losing 2-3 a/c lines (757,717,747(?)). Airbus too has it's MANY loyal customers as does Boeing. I think that they are both well off and it isn't even a matter of how one will do against the other.
9V-SPF From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1375 posts, RR: 3 Reply 19, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 11044 times:
you and your reasonless Airbus bashing.
I don´t see him bashing anyone. Although I do not agree with some of his points (for example the need for an A320 replacement), he argued in a civilized manner and explained his point of view (which he is entitled to) while you did not.
I personally think that the best thing which can happen to the industry (and its customers) would be a huge success for the 7e7 (and it´s looking quite good at the moment) as this would most probably force Airbus to come up with something new, maybe even more advanced.
Remember that competition is an indispensable requirement for technological progress and no one can deny that we wouldn´t have the pleasure of riding on brilliant masterpieces of engineering like the B777 or the A330 today if it had not been for at least two great manufacturers since the 1970s.
Roberta From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 20, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 11002 times:
The 7e7 will sure be a good product but so many airlines have the A332 (40 odd) that i think Airbus have more time on ther hands to react.
Dont agree with going for the A320 replacement next. The A320 is on par with the 737NG's at the moment. I think an update will be on the cards in the future but the A310/A300 is in need of a replacement. They are the only Airbus A/C which dont use FBW.
And BTW when Boeing say 15%-20%, dont take that too literally. Both Boeing and Airbus overestimate their planes in their statements.
Planemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5696 posts, RR: 34 Reply 21, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 10945 times:
I just want to echo Roberta's post about the 15-20% figure and add that this percentage also has to be put into proper context -- vs other aircraft and impact on an airline's fleet and overall operating cost. It seems that a lot of people are reading these figures as "more fuel efficient" or "cost efficient" (for example), which are obviously 2 different things.
What would be interesting is to see Boeing's breakdown of the projected 7E7 % advantage in terms of fuel, maintenance, ownership, residual value, etc.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 10931 times:
IMO, competition as well as necessity are the mothers of invention. I sometimes wonder why some of the users seem to crave the hegemony of one manufacturer over the entire marketplace. Lord knows innovation and quality would suffer, and unit prices would rise. Even the former Soviet Union had multiple design bureaus. Boeing has made its move, Airbus will surely counter and everyone involved will be the better for it.
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 846 posts, RR: 51 Reply 24, posted (9 years 5 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 10857 times:
you and your reasonless Airbus bashing.
Trying to see where exactly I was Airbus bashing...
Was it when I explained what a bleedless/bleed-air aircraft was, or that the A330 was threatened by the 7E7?
Why? The A318-21 family has proven to be a good product and will still be for many years
Reason being, in 2018 the A320 family will be 30 years old. Thirtyyears old. When you call the 737 a 37 year old aircraft, this is partially false as the NG aircraft are as modern as possible. But in 2018, the A320 will be pretty damn old.
Airbus would be hardpressed to match the 7E7 with the A330 family. The best way to go, as we mostly agree, is an all new A330 replacement. Problem is, the A330 line is tied at the waist to the A340 line. Airbus could replace both of these aircraft with a single line of aircraft, the first being A332 size, the next being A333/A343 size, the last being slightly smaller than the A346. They would be large twins with range in the 7,000-8,000nm market. If this aircraft entered service in 2010-2015, the 777 would be pushing 20 years old.
But Airbus could, and should IMO, react first with an A320 replacement. If the A320-replacement stops the 737NG in its tracks, as the 7E7 will probably do to the A330, Airbus would greatly slow Boeing's advance. By seating 2+2+2 in a narrow-wide configuration Airbus can maximize underfloor cargo and pitch it as a 7E7SR competitor. It's narrower configuration would appear more appealing for short-range flights. Many customers would balk at jumping from a 220 seat 752 to a 280 seat 7E7-3. Sizing the A320 replacement in 220, 180, and 140 incriments solves this problem.
Both Boeing and Airbus overestimate their planes in their statements.
Except Boeing typically exceeds them
I don't think it's a case of what Airbus has that can compete with the 7E7 but rather, what does Boeing have to compete with the A380.
Boeing came to the opinion that the superjumbo market cannot sustain two competing models. I tend to see this as a good idea because, rather than getting in a pissing contest over size, Boeing is taking on the real money makers. Boeing's focus is to destroy the business case for what is currently Airbus strongest product line- the A332. That is their response to the A380.
Time will tell...
25 Planemaker: "By seating 2+2+2 in a narrow-wide configuration Airbus..." sounds nice in theory but airlines would not go for sub-200 pax aircraft in that configura
26 DfwRevolution: sounds nice in theory but airlines would not go for sub-200 pax aircraft in that configuration for the simple reason that having an extra aisle in a 6
27 ACAfan: post #11: What would we think of Chysler if they started making a car that NEEDED larger roadways on which to travel? Chrysler DID invent the minivan,
28 Planemaker: "Rapid turnarounds perhaps? You only have 3 passengers per row squeezing down an isle rather than 6." "Airlines could make their domestic product all
29 Md80fanatic: "Chrysler DID invent the minivan, and AMC invented the SUV" Well yes, but the road didn't need modification for those monsters to fit on it. I agree t
30 Leskova: True, the A380 will need an expanded infrastructure... but that wouldn't be that much of a problem if the airports had built terminal stands according
31 Manni: How is Airbus going to compete with the 7E7? By matching the price of the A330 with the price of a 7E7. Exactely what they did with the 20 A333's for
32 9V-SPF: Also, if you are seated 2+2+2 in comfortable seats, with IFE and decent a la carte meal service, what reason do you have to fly first class if the tri
33 9V-SPF: By matching the price of the A330 with the price of a 7E7. Exactely what they did with the 20 A333's for China Eastern. I don´t know about the exact
34 Gigneil: LH tried the 753... ...and hated it. A la carte meal service is the way everything is going, especially on the majors. A buy your own type approach. A
35 NWA330Tony: All it takes is Airbus Fitting the new technology engines in its A330's and vwala instant solution!
36 Peteinmiami: Clear and simple I think the 7E7 Program is just the way Boeing is answering to the Airbus successful aircraft program, not the other way!!!!
37 A330Jamaica: I have said it over and over again. If I were Airbus, I would be worrying about how the A380 is going to fare and not worrying about the 7E7. Commerci
38 Roberta: Commercial aviation ten years from now will be SMALLER, I repeat SMALLER than it is at present i looked at those sites and found this For six consecut
39 Aerosol: Depnds how you define smaller. Could also mean less frequency....bigger planes!
40 Keesje: Sideline : Chrysler DID invent the minivan, and AMC invented the SUV Minican The Matra/Renault/Talbot Espace or P18, 1980, production 1984 ? SVU: the
41 Ruscoe: Airbus leaders have already stated how they will compete with the 7E7. PRICE. In the short term that is all they can do. The 380 is draining all Airbu
42 Roberta: Airbus are in a fine position. The A320 is selling well and is a good product. The A332 is bettered by the 7E7 but many customers have the A332 and wo
43 DfwRevolution: The A332 is bettered by the 7E7 but many customers have the A332 and wont necessarily go for the 7E7, just buy more A332's instead, This is true as it
44 VSXA380X800: I had no time to read a 50 thousand reply(so I just read the first few and the last few) so I will just would like to respond by saying Airbus should
45 Roberta: Of which the 773ER can possibly match The 773ER growth is limited by the GE90's Thrust, mabe you could squeeze an extra 10,000lbs out of it, you'll ha
46 Propulsion: The short answer to the question posed would be: with difficulty. Price is probably the most likely weapon thereafter.
47 BWIA 772: It seems like Boeing is saying to Airbus you may have won the battle but you will not win the war. BTW will the 7e7 have automatic doors like the L101
48 Sandiaman: There is an article written by R. Aboulafia, published in Aerospace America in April 04. The article theorizes on Airbus' competitive response to the