ViasaMSY From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 94 posts, RR: 0 Posted (10 years 4 months 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 5569 times:
The Airbus online magazine, Airbus4U, has already posted digital images of the A358 and the A359. Can anybody post the differences between the A330 and the A350 and if possible between the A350 and the 7E7? They do not seem obvious to me. There have been discussions about this topic before but I have not been able to find comparative data in one particular thread.
DfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1036 posts, RR: 51
Reply 2, posted (10 years 4 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5525 times:
The A350s will feature GEnx engines. Both will feature a 242t takeoff weight.
It's likely (probably garunteed) that Rolls Royce will come on as an engine supplier in due time with a derrivitive of the Trent 1000.
I personally wonder if the Trent 900 and GP7000 were studied as more cost attractive options as they are both modern engines as well. They would have also avoided the problem of bleedless systems all together, if that is Airbus intention. Are there (legal) restrictions as to which airplanes can be powered by these engines?
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 81
Reply 5, posted (10 years 4 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5486 times:
They would have also avoided the problem of bleedless systems all together, if that is Airbus intention.
Modifying the GEnx or Trent 1000 for bleedful ops is simple, simple, simple. You just add the power offtake. There were articles originally when RR announced the engine family that it would be an effortless mod to offer it on Airbus frames with bleed air systems.
Right now, the power offtake is a generator. You can make a bleed tap replace that without much effort. In fact, I think the generator itself uses engine air.
Are there (legal) restrictions as to which airplanes can be powered by these engines?
The GP7200 is bound by agreement. Its only to power the A380 and potential 747 derivatives. The Trent 900 no problem.
The GEnx and Trent 1000 were launched almost 7 years after those engine types. They'll be WAY more efficient.
ViasaMSY From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 94 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (10 years 4 months 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 5465 times:
Thanks for the welcoming words ConcordeBoy. But is it possible to just discuss the technical aspects of the question instead of falling in the usual A Vs. B or A350 Vs. 7E7 arguments?. As I said, after reading the article in Airbus4U, the differences seem not to be obvious. I thought that would be interesting to see comparative data.
Widebody From Ireland, joined Aug 2000, 1152 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (10 years 4 months 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 5416 times:
The A350 is aimed at upsetting the 7E7 market as much as possible, while aiding the flagging Airbus long range fleet. The A330 is a fine aircraft, the A340 range just doesn't seem to be doing it. Many airlines have stated the 7E7 isn't big enough, they're aiming at that end + the lower end of the 777 range + current A340 market.
The A350 will basically take as much as it can from the 7E7, while eliminating the main technical issues associated with the Airbus A330/A340 fleet e.g. landing gear, fuel system, bleed air, air con etc.