Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
"Any 747 Order Is A Potential A380 Order". Airbus  
User currently offlineJuventus From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2835 posts, RR: 2
Posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10201 times:

The January issue of Airline Business Magazine, has an article on the A380.

The A380 program director responding to the size and orders "We have great order expectations. Any 747 order, is a potential A380 order ". If the difference is more than 200 seats, I don't think they should be compared.

On a related story. The article also said that Boeing has not received an order for the 747-400 (passenger configuration) since 2002. Is the production line open just for the cargo sector?



52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4768 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10067 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The last orders for passenger 744s were for 4 for CI in 2002 and 2 have been delivered already and IIRC the other 2 are due this year, MH supposedly has 2 still on the books from a previous order for delivery in 08 and 09. Wanna bet those never happen?

User currently offlineJuventus From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2835 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10011 times:

Is it safe to say that if the 7E7 project does not materialise, Boeing will only produce the 737 and 777. wow, how the tables have turned.

User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10002 times:

Wow, Juventus, you have a penchant for the overdramatic. "How the tables have turned?" I think at this point the 787 is a done deal.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineMidnightMike From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2892 posts, RR: 14
Reply 4, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9938 times:

Juventus

The 787 will happen, almost 200 orders. 737 & 777 programs are going very strong, plus, you have the 767 Tanker Program & the 737 MMA program going.



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineJuventus From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 2835 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9884 times:

I guess I'm the only one who looks at the glass half empty. Like most Americans, I'm a boeing fan, but I think the wide-body market will eventually go to Airbus.

User currently offlineNewark777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 9348 posts, RR: 29
Reply 6, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9878 times:

I guess I'm the only one who looks at the glass half empty

I guess you are. Actually, it is more like you are looking at a glass that is almost full as almost empty.

Harry



Why grab a Heine when you can grab a Busch?
User currently offlineAviationwiz From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 962 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9864 times:

If any 747 order is a potential A380 order, then any A330 order is a potential 787 order, and so on and so forth... kind of a stupid comment to make from the A380 program director.


Proudly from the Home of the Red Tail.
User currently offlineSjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9857 times:

The point is that Airbus is betting on 2 future trends (A350 and A380) and Boeing 's money is only on one (B787) so far.

Sjoerd



Flanders + Wallonnia + Brussels = the UNITED STATES of BELGIUM
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6485 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 9836 times:

No, they're betting on the hub-centric trend. If they were betting on the other one, they'd scrap the A330/A340/A350 altogether and do a new airframe from scratch. What they're doing is trying to save what sales they can hedging against Boeing's (so far successful) attempt to cut into a segment where they were not quite prepared.


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineB2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1369 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 9788 times:

Boeing has said that half of all 747s produced before the mid-1990s were sold for their range, not their capacity. The arrival of long-range 300-seaters like the 777 and A340 has taken a big bite out of 747 sales, which have obviously slowed pretty dramatically. Even if the A380 takes most of the rest of that market, will it be enough to recoup a $15 billion investment?

--B2707SST



Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
User currently offlineSjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 9785 times:

I partially agree that A is playing catch up and it remains to be seen how successful they are with the A350.

The A350 is not some cheap derivative just because it will have the same fuselage dimensions, it will have a completely new wing (with a higher degree of composites than in the B787 one) and new engines, meaning pretty much a new aircraft. Development costs are about 5 bn usd. Not too much is known about the A350 but A is smart enough to make it competitive with the B787 and they still have time to make adjustments.

You can't deny that Airbus has a product for each future trend and that Boeing does not.

On the other hand it would have been stupid of Airbus to launch something like the A350 before Boeing launched the B787. Their products (A332 and A333) were outselling Boeings product (B767s) so there was no need to invest as there was no real competition. They were (and still are and will be for the next 3.5 years) making a lot of money with them. When B acted A reacted (they saw the need, were able to and had the will to) !

I think there is a need for a middle sized long range aircraft and a very large long range aircraft in the future. Airbus offers both types, Boeing only offers one type.

Airbus is definitely not betting on the hub trend alone !

Sjoerd

[Edited 2005-02-03 04:56:25]


Flanders + Wallonnia + Brussels = the UNITED STATES of BELGIUM
User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4387 posts, RR: 19
Reply 12, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 9760 times:

"The A350 is not some cheap derivative just because it will have the same fuselage dimensions, it will have a completely new wing (with a higher degree of composites than in the B787 one) and new engines, meaning pretty much a new aircraft."

No, new engines and new wings do NOT equal a new aircraft, period.



Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineSjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 9742 times:

It says pretty much a new aircraft.

Sjoerd



Flanders + Wallonnia + Brussels = the UNITED STATES of BELGIUM
User currently offlineTrevD From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 327 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 9672 times:

So Sjoerd - by that same reasoning do you agree that the 737NG is also pretty much a new aircraft ??

User currently offlineSjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 9655 times:

Yes, hence it's success. Hopefully the A350 is as successfull !
By that same reasoning do you agree that the A350 has a good chance to be a success ?

Sjoerd

[Edited 2005-02-03 05:49:49]


Flanders + Wallonnia + Brussels = the UNITED STATES of BELGIUM
User currently offlineTrevD From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 327 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9574 times:

Sjoerd - Yes I do, but only if they follow through and do the upgrades necessary to make the airplane competitive.

I've seen numbers from both manufacturers on the A330 and the 7E7 and I'm convinced that Airbus must react to the 7E7. Otherwise Boeing will run away with the entire middle of the market and instantly obsolete the A300, A310's (I know, gone anyway), but also today's current A330 and A340-200's and -300's. So Airbus must respond - and quite frankly, I give them credit for reacting as quickly as they have in recognizing the threat.

But to be competitive, they are truly going to have to do a complete overhaul of the A330 product and offer similar 7E7 technology engines, the new wing, and improve overall structural efficiency (i.e. fuselage). If they do all that, then yes, I do believe the A350 has a chance of being a success!!

Regards,

Trev


User currently offlineAvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2472 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 9545 times:

"kind of a stupid comment to make from the A380 program director."

I agree. There's been at least airline interest, if not yet launch orders, for BCA's 747 Advanced proposal. I think that's because some of these airlines would prefer a nominal 450 seater, not 550 or so. The A380 has stolen many 747 sales but it won't necessarily take all of them. If a carrier knows it can't fill 500+ seats, it might look for something a bit smaller but comparable in other aspects. Whether the Adv. gets launched is still in doubt but for airlines to be looking at it, there must be some interest in having a somewhat smaller airplane than the A388. Even a difference of 100 seats, not just 200 or more, seems significant. Not everyone will want to 'misuse' the A380 like Singapore to fly fewer than 500. The current 744 for passengers may be a lame duck but a tweaked, reengined 747 stretch seems to have appeal for many that aren't quite ready to join the superjumbo club, if it's price is kept reasonable.


User currently offlineUAL747DEN From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 2392 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9475 times:

You won't hear too many good things about Airbus from me so read closely it might be the only time!
Now it should be obvious that Airbus is going to have the best large aircraft on the market. Even if Boeing makes the 747ADV it will not be as good as the A380. Boeing would make it for 2 reasons. 1) Fleet commonality 2) Less people. Boeing is playing catch up on this project. If an airline can save a little by buying the A380 over the 747ADV but they have an all Boeing fleet, would they add the Airbus and all the costs that come along or just use the Boeing? I think that most would use the Boeing and that is what Boeing is trying to figure out right now! If Airbus is the only maker out there than the airlines dont even have a choice and Boeing is just giving customers away.
Now as far as the 787, Boeing is producing the best aircraft for this market. Airbus is catching up. Airbus will make the A350 because they do not want to just give the market to Boeing. Would an all Airbus airline want to add the Boeing, NO! Would they pay a little more to have to Airbus? YES, and there it is that is why one is making the other. If they didnt they are giving up the market and its hard to get back what you have given away.



/// UNITED AIRLINES
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 9454 times:

Related thread I started a couple of days ago:

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/1936362/


User currently offlinePlaneSmart From New Zealand, joined Dec 2004, 930 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 9368 times:

UAL747DEN

'If an airline can save a little by buying the A380 over the 747ADV but they have an all Boeing fleet, would they add the Airbus and all the costs that come along or just use the Boeing? I think that most would use the Boeing and that is what Boeing is trying to figure out right now!

At the moment airlines have the choice of a 744 ('80/90's technology/efficiency) which B can heavily discount (all R&D and associated costs amortised) or A38.

If B develop a 744ADV, they can make a few changes that produce the easiest (cheapest benefits), like new engines, tweak wing, lighten structure. It will produce benefits over the 744, but cost more than a 744, and be a short life (interim) improvement for customers, with high degree of commonality. It could be ready in 2008/9. But who wants it? Quite frankly this version of the 747ADV could be a retrofit to existing aircraft, something no doubt that B are concerned about. Conversions occur instead of new sales.

The other option is a much more drastic change. This version of the 747ADV would offer A38 operating efficiencies, or better. Delivery in 2010/11, depending how much of a new model it really is.

But if B are delivering a 747ADV in 2011 (with no R&D/production & start-up costs amortised), and A are delivering A38's (with a high % of R&D/production start-up costs amortised), A has the ability to discount (just as B can do now with the 744), where B won't be able to.

That shifts lifetime ownership costs in favour of the A38, and allows SQ for instance to operate one model instead of 2 (immediate savings), and the financial penalty of operating a 550 seat aircraft with 450 passengers, versus a 450 seat aircraft with 450 passengers shrinks.

B are now trying to gain support for something between these two extremes, with little interest. I haven't encountered a single client that is seriously looking at the 747ADV, or believes B is serious either. The one qualification is, if A38 performance isn't as expected. If this happens, the expectation is that sales of both the A38 and 787 will halt, pending A38 solutions and 787 performance.

UAL you mention a 'Boeing fleet'. Are we talking 747ADV commonality with other 747's? Apart from the B name, the current model range is anything but common. The 747ADV design team (or perhaps other more senior influences)can't even decide whether cockpit commonality will be based on 744, 777, 787 or something else.


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9190 times:

The point is that Airbus is betting on 2 future trends (A350 and A380) and Boeing 's money is only on one (B787) so far.

You and Airbus keep thinking that and you'll wake up one morning very shortly here and find you've had your asses handed to you on a silver platter while you spent all of your available investment money on a 550 pax single use aircraft.


User currently offlineNumberTwelve From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 1431 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 9183 times:

B 7e7, maybe you are a little disgruntled?
Maybe you cool down a little, dude?

A gets subsidies and B doesnt! (need a laugh?) So there is enough money for A  Wink/being sarcastic



signature censored by admin - so check my profile
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9162 times:

Nope.. Just being straight up. If Airbus thinks Boeing is going to build the 787 as an orphan aircraft and people want to think that then they will wake up one morning after Boeing has announced an entire line of new, more efficient aircraft seating from 100 to 350 passengers and have absolutely no response, and no way to respond other than play catch up and make quick modifications to existing airframes. Just like Boeing has had to do in the last few years.

It's just a simple observation of the situation.


User currently offlineLifelinerOne From Netherlands, joined Nov 2003, 1922 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (9 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 9124 times:

No, new engines and new wings do NOT equal a new aircraft, period.

Well, maybe nice to know that the A350 fuselage will also be new. The same size, but constructed with the low-weight glare. Glare has been used for the first time on the A380.

So the A350 will have:

* A new lightweight fuselage with glare components
* A new wing
* 2 new bleedless engines

Does it count now as a new plane?

Cheers!



Only Those Who Sleep Don't Make Mistakes
25 Adria : it's nice to see that Airbus is not making the same mistake Boeing did at the beginning when they underestimated the competitor
26 NYC777 : the A350 won't have bleedless engines, they will use the same engines as the 787 but they will use bleed air. Thus they won't be removing the duct wor
27 Juventus : Nobody is playing catch up. Its two manufacturers going head to head. Right now, Airbus is ahead. But like everything in aviation, it is SUBJECT TO CH
28 Boeing7E7 : Nobody is playing catch up. So that's what the 350 is.
29 Sjoerd : If Airbus thinks Boeing is going to build the 787 as an orphan aircraft and people want to think that then they will wake up one morning after Boeing
30 Leelaw : "They even couldn't develop the B787 on their own !" What's inherently wrong with Boeing entering into partnerships, joint-ventures, and consortiums i
31 Mrocktor : "Nobody is playing catch up. So that's what the 350 is." You are far behind and you start running faster, if the other guy speeds up as well that does
32 Post contains images Boeing7E7 : I am looking at the present situation and what's currently on offer, you are not. Way to go proving my point! Thanks!
33 Sjoerd : I am looking at the present situation and what's currently on offer, you are not. Way to go proving my point! Thanks! What else can you do when you're
34 Leelaw : "The problem with massive outsourcing is that your profits are smaller (they go to the other companies as well), meaning less money available for futu
35 Boeing7E7 : Do you think A is going to sit by and watch ? That's pretty much all they can do, for about 3-4 years.
36 Rj111 : I often wonder If A and B do sincerely belive in their market forecast, or if they just made them up afterwards to promote/put down their or the oppos
37 Wingman : Here's a more accurate way of loking at things IMO. Some say Boeing is down to the 777, 737 and new 787. They've just taken serious charges in closing
38 PlaneSmart : Agree Wingman. Don't rule out an A36 version of the A35.
39 Lazybones : Good points wingman, I think the lines boeing are closing will actually allow them to base all future a/c on the 787 platform. But they need the 787 t
40 RIX : "Who knows they might even have a 4 engine version in the future to compete with a340 and avoid ETOPS." - it's about 787, isn't it? I'd rather see str
41 ConcordeBoy : I often wonder If A and B do sincerely belive in their market forecast, or if they just made them up afterwards to promote/put down their or the oppos
42 Lazybones : 777 frame definitely has a huge potential Yes it does, but if the 787 performs as expected, then the 777 could easily be superceded by the 787 in much
43 CORULEZ05 : NO comparison..........a 747 order can NOT be considered a potention A380 order. They are very different planes.......A380 offering much more than the
44 Astuteman : Corulez05 I certainly agree with your point that 747 and 380 are different aircraft. From a point of view of establishing POTENTIAL marketplace for th
45 AvObserver : "Well, maybe nice to know that the A350 fuselage will also be new. The same size, but constructed with the low-weight glare. So the A350 will have: *
46 RIX : "if the 787 performs as expected, then the 777 could easily be superceded by the 787 in much the same way the A350 will supercede the A330." - if both
47 Ken777 : A potential order for a 747 "may" be a potential order for a 380, or it may be a potential order for a 777. The 747 fits rather nicely between the two
48 Lazybones : potential '777NG' that may use 787 technology Good idea, but it probably makes more business sense to do it the other way around. IE take what you ha
49 Greaser : And also I reckon A is scheming on another stretch of the A340 to fill that gap from the A346 to A387. It would make it a flying sausage and a half at
50 Lazybones : The A340-600 is already 75.3m, a stretch to fit 450 would exceed the 80 X 80 box size for the airports I know, thats why I said keeping it under 80m.
51 Boeing7E7 : Speaking of 787 encroachment into the 772 market: DL: 268 (2 Class) AA: 224 (3 Class) AA: 245 (3 Class/Higher Density) BA: 229 (3 Class) 787-8 - 223 3
52 Juventus : How big is 787 (compared to a 767)?
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Avianca "to Order" 42 Widebodies (Airbus/Boeing?) posted Sat Feb 4 2006 20:21:01 by Luisde8cd
First 747 Tale Is Going "home" Again! posted Wed Oct 26 2005 13:31:57 by 797charter
AI Order "Almost" Approved! posted Thu Aug 25 2005 16:42:58 by Sunnyb
Changing Times: Qatar Airways "a Blue-chip Order" posted Wed Jun 22 2005 22:44:49 by Teahan
AS To Order "a Couple Of Dozen More 737s" posted Mon Jun 13 2005 18:51:06 by Clickhappy
AC Will Be First In "Star Order" posted Thu Oct 23 2003 09:02:05 by 717fan
Does BA Still Have Any B 747-400s On Order? posted Wed Sep 26 2001 04:23:53 by United Airline
Airline "order" Numbers/codes. posted Sun Oct 24 1999 14:10:09 by TriStar
EK's Tim Clark On A380: "We Need That Aircraft" posted Tue Nov 7 2006 23:15:42 by PlaneHunter
Lufthansa 12 747-8 Order Soon posted Tue Nov 7 2006 00:09:02 by Jimyvr