Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Airbus Able To Build A Composite Fuselage?  
User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 7669 times:

Is Airbus even capable of building a composite fuselage to compete with the 787? Reading this article from January 2005 makes me wonder:

Quote:
If Boeing engineers can solve the puzzle of building successfully with composites, they will eliminate hundreds of thousands of rivets, hours of machining time, and billions of dollars in expensive manufacturing machinery. That, in turn, should allow Boeing to price its new jet more competitively.

Charles Champion, the Airbus executive who is managing the A380's development, said last summer that he has nothing against composites.

But after years studying the trade-offs between metal and plastic, he said, Airbus decided that composites cost too much to use practically in large structures like fuselage barrels.

Building a fuselage out of composites, Champion said, "is a bit like a cake. It has to be perfect. If it isn't perfect it is ugly. We are very skeptical."

"Have you seen the B2 fly by at almost $1 billion a copy?" asked Leahy at Airbus. "It only has two seats."

Leahy at Airbus concedes that Boeing may have solved the riddle of making large, one-piece barrels.

"I believe if they say they're going to do it, they will," he said.

"The other guy's saying he can't do it. So let him say that," Frank Statkus of Boeing said. "He can't do it because he can't. We can do it because we can."


159 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineMark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7649 times:

Beauing -- makes me wonder

Well fine, Beauing. But so what  fluffy 


Boeing folks have their backs up against a wall here and to their credit they're at least not rolling over but are going for the gusto and trying to really advance jetliner design technology along a by few major steps. Can they do it --or for that matter Airbus or even for that matter Russian or Japanese or Korean or a whole bunch of other guys around the world too? Why of course they all can. At least for a few planes anyway. Just a question of how much resources they put into the effort.

The real and unanswered question is can anybody make them cost-effectively for commercial sales in the industry, and without a whole bunch of added technical headaches for airlines to worry about once they're flying 'em. Thanks to Boeing at least we'll soon get a glimpse into all that in the next couple years ahead  Smile


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7616 times:

There is a lot of complexity in the construction method that Boeing are developing. Not only are the tape-laying machines complex, not only is it difficult to machine such large mandrels to the specs needed, but the direction in which each layer of tape is laid is an engineering question. I'd wager that Boeing are developing software tools to aid in figuring out exactly where to lay each stretch of tape. That might be the most difficult part for a competitor to duplicate.

User currently offlineAlessandro From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7616 times:

Well, SAAB aircraft was asked by Airbus to make the wingparts they do in composites,
unfortunatly it didn´t work out...


User currently offlineSjoerd From Belgium, joined Aug 2003, 361 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7606 times:

The A400M has a composite fuselage and a higher percentage of composites overall than the B787, so yes they can.

Sjoerd



Flanders + Wallonnia + Brussels = the UNITED STATES of BELGIUM
User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2809 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7606 times:

Quoting Beauing (Thread starter):
"Have you seen the B2 fly by at almost $1 billion a copy?" asked Leahy at Airbus. "It only has two seats."

What!? What has a medium sized airliner got to do with stealth bomber? If I were the suspicious type, I would say this comment was evidence he was really afraid of Boeing's composite fuselage and was grasping at straws for a way to talk it down.


User currently offlineBeaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 25
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7585 times:

I think the USA have a technology advance in terms of composites tied to their defence-developments.How long that advance will remain and how many years the Airbus team is behind - nobody really knows.
Technically speaking ,Airbus might be in a position to create an all-composite body or wing but the commercial feasability might be the problem. If out of three bodies one has layer-faults or structural weaknesses- well it's commercially unviable.



Please respect animals - don't eat them...
User currently offlineMD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13813 posts, RR: 63
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7569 times:

One problem with composites is that manufacturing faultsd can not be corrected and will only be noticed once the whole part has been finished. This lead to a huge amount of waste when Airbus first tried out composite tail fins (they had to scrap one out of three right in the factory), so they went, for a while, back to aluminium.

Jan


User currently offlineMark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7567 times:

Glom --If I were the suspicious type,

Then let's maybe hope you're actually not  cool 

(and not be surprised if Leahy continues with his usual spiel, as most everybody around here 'suspects' he probably will. Actually at times he's even somewhat entertaining with that  Smile )


User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7566 times:

Quoting Mark_D. (Reply 1):
The real and unanswered question is can anybody make them cost-effectively for commercial sales in the industry,

No kidding! Gee you're smart... If it's going to compete with the 787 it must be a commercial application. That goes without saying.

And if it's So what?
Why do you bother to respond?


User currently offlineMark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7553 times:

Beauing-- That goes without saying.


Less so if Boeing's backs are up against a wall a bit, Beauing.


And if it's So what?
Why do you bother to respond?


Maybe it'll help you out a tad with perspective!

Plus put some levity into the zany-right-off-the-bat thread as well  Smile


User currently offlineKC135R From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 725 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7541 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 5):
What!? What has a medium sized airliner got to do with stealth bomber? If I were the suspicious type, I would say this comment was evidence he was really afraid of Boeing's composite fuselage and was grasping at straws for a way to talk it down.

Glom, this is why I like your posts - you tell it like it is. The B-2 is expensive because it has stealth technology, it is the first real production flying wing design, it had to meet stringent DoD standards, and the development costs - which were to be spread out over many airplanes - ended up being split between the 21 that were ordered, much less than the original 130+ that were asked for. So comparing an extremely advanced military bomber concept to a revolutionary commercial airplane, in the area of potential costs, is ridiculous.


User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7514 times:

Quoting Alessandro (Reply 3):
The A400M has a composite fuselage and a higher percentage of composites overall than the B787, so yes they can.

Yes, but a military application doesn't have the cost constraints that a civil airliner project has. Can Airbus build a composite competitor to the 787 in the A350, or a replacement for the A300 or A320?


User currently offlineKC135R From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 725 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 7511 times:

Quoting Mark_D. (Reply 10):
Less so if Boeing's backs are up against a wall a bit, Beauing.

You know you keep using this expression over and over again. How exactly is Boeing's back up against the wall? Here's the situation with the 787 - Boeing introduces it, Airbus initially counters with "the 787 will not be effective competition against the A330, we do not need to develop a new airplane to compete." Then, interest in the 787 grows so Airbus says "we will take the engines designed for the 787 and put them on the A330, efficiency will be matched close enough that we won't have to design a new airplane." Then sales begin to boom, so Airbus says "we will offer the A350, it will be an A330 derivative with a new wing, new engines, etc, etc" - but nobody buys it - well except Air Europa for 10 - so now they say "the A350 is constantly evolving, no longer an A330 derivative, it will be all new."

Now, judging by the facts at hand - not speculation and opinion, who exactly has who against a wall at this moment in time?  Smile

A few years ago, yes Airbus had the upper hand - surpassing Boeing in sales for the first time ever. The tides have changed for now, if you can't see that you are blind.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 915 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7477 times:

Quoting Sjoerd (Reply 4):
The A400M has a composite fuselage and a higher percentage of composites overall than the B787, so yes they can.

The 787 is 80% composite by volume, so I'd really like to see an exact quoute as to the A400M's construction...

Besides, it's less can they than it is will they.

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 6):
I think the USA have a technology advance in terms of composites tied to their defence-developments.How long that advance will remain and how many years the Airbus team is behind - nobody really knows.

To some degree or another, Boeing has been trying to get the composite ball rolling for twenty years. The 7J7 in 1988 featured primarily carbon laminate construction and the 737NG was planned with a composite wing... neither panned-out.

Quoting MD11Engineer (Reply 7):
One problem with composites is that manufacturing faultsd can not be corrected and will only be noticed once the whole part has been finished. This lead to a huge amount of waste when Airbus first tried out composite tail fins (they had to scrap one out of three right in the factory), so they went, for a while, back to aluminium.

That isn't to say precise quality control cannot be maintained. The main fan of the Ge90 is carbon laminate, and only two individual fan blades have ever required replacement since EOS.

Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 6):
If out of three bodies one has layer-faults or structural weaknesses- well it's commercially unviable.

The q.c of current composite materials is well over 90%

http://www.geae.com/ourcommitment/innovation/ge90fanblade.html


User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7477 times:

Quoting Mark_D. (Reply 10):
Less so if Boeing's backs are up against a wall a bit, Beauing.

Maybe it'll help you out a tad with perspective!

Plus put some levity into the zany-right-off-the-bat thread as well

I think it's Airbus who's back is against the wall. The A350 is failing in the market place. There are rumors they are scrapping the design and going back to the drawing board. Will it ever compete without going to an all composite fuselage? That's a perfectly legitimate discussion for a.net.


User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2809 posts, RR: 10
Reply 16, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7473 times:

I've been wondering about the 787 engines on the A350. Can they really just take engines designed for a Boeing product? Didn't Boeing pay for their development in some way?

User currently offlineKC135R From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 725 posts, RR: 4
Reply 17, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7457 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 14):
That isn't to say precise quality control cannot be maintained. The main fan of the Ge90 is carbon laminate, and only two individual fan blades have ever required replacement since EOS.

Evidently GE must be happy with how that worked out since the GEnx engine will also have a composite fan casing. They are increasing the use of composites in their engines.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9841 posts, RR: 96
Reply 18, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7457 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Beauing (Reply 12):
Yes, but a military application doesn't have the cost constraints that a civil airliner project has. Can Airbus build a composite competitor to the 787 in the A350, or a replacement for the A300 or A320?

Your original question, though, and the post that started the thread questioned Airbus' technical ability in the absolute. On the assumption that the A400 will be built, the answer has to be "yes".

As to whether Airbus can commercially build a competitor to the 787, we have no proof yet that Boeing can commercially build the 787.

Before you get upset, I personally believe that Boeing can do it, and will do it, that it won't be plain sailing, and that they will have to resolve lots of problems in the process.
However, I also believe that Airbus can do this.
The difference to me is the level of risk versus reward that the different companies are prepared to take AT THIS TIME.

I applaud Boeing and can't wait for them to succeed with the 787.
I feel that it is dangerous for you to assume that Airbus isn't capable of doing the same thing.


User currently offlineBeauing From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7454 times:

Quoting KC135R (Reply 13):
Airbus initially counters with "the 787 will not be effective competition against the A330, we do not need to develop a new airplane to compete." Then, interest in the 787 grows so Airbus says "we will take the engines designed for the 787 and put them on the A330, efficiency will be matched close enough that we won't have to design a new airplane." Then "we will offer the A350, it will be an A330 derivative with a new wing, new engines, etc, etc" - so now they say "the A350 is constantly evolving, no longer an A330 derivative, it will be all new."

Oh and dont forget the 'detuned' A330 where they were going to eliminate the galley's to save weight. An idea that would be funny if it weren't so pathetic...


User currently offlineBurnsie28 From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 7504 posts, RR: 8
Reply 20, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7435 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 5):
Quoting Beauing (Thread starter):
"Have you seen the B2 fly by at almost $1 billion a copy?" asked Leahy at Airbus. "It only has two seats."

What!? What has a medium sized airliner got to do with stealth bomber? If I were the suspicious type, I would say this comment was evidence he was really afraid of Boeing's composite fuselage and was grasping at straws for a way to talk it down.

First off that was exactly what I was thinking. That was a stupid statement. Really, I was like, WTF does a military bomber and its price (which is mostly due to stealth technology and the other instruments that are not seen nor known of to the public, not the "fuse" itself)

Quoting Glom (Reply 16):
I've been wondering about the 787 engines on the A350. Can they really just take engines designed for a Boeing product? Didn't Boeing pay for their development in some way?

Welcome to my Respected Users, not only for the first one, but honestly, Airbus has been going pretty low lately, first they whine they need more money from the government, then they fund the US/HP merger with millions, which essentually was "buying" A350 orders, which HP/US have no use for. Interesting that Airbus cant come up with its own things.

A380= MD-12
A350= 787
A330= 767
etc.



"Some People Just Know How To Fly"- Best slogan ever, RIP NW 1926-2009
User currently offlineMark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7403 times:

KC135R-- How exactly is Boeing's back up against the wall?

Boeing's back is up against the wall because they either come through with the 787 as advertised -- which by all means let's hope they do, even just on a technical merit basis for the industry's sake -- or they maybe go out of the airliner production business after 737NG and 777 sales peter out probably by decade's end. Big stakes indeed!

Here's the situation with the 787 - Boeing introduces it, Airbus initially counters with "the 787 will not be effective competition against the A330, we do not need to develop a new airplane to compete." Then, interest in the 787 grows so Airbus says "we will take the engines designed for the 787 and put them on the A330, efficiency will be matched close enough that we won't have to design a new airplane." Then sales begin to boom, so Airbus says "we will offer the A350, it will be an A330 derivative with a new wing, new engines, etc, etc" - but nobody buys it - well except Air Europa for 10 - so now they say "the A350 is constantly evolving, no longer an A330 derivative, it will be all new."


Actually this helter-skelter-response take on things sounds way more like Boeing PR guys' attitutes over the years to the A380, and their own 747 X Adv.

While Airbus for years likely knew they'd sure have to come up with an A300/A310 replacement at some point but had their hands full with the A380 program instead. And which now that that's way more of a done deal they can finally go ahead and also look to replace (or upgrade or whatever) the A330 along with it as well. Especially if yeah of course they do feel a bit of competitive pressure from Boeing's 787 project and recent sales sucessess alongside.


User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 915 posts, RR: 51
Reply 22, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7402 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 16):
Didn't Boeing pay for their development in some way?

No... in fact it's the other way around. The manufactures had to design engines and then submit them to Boeing. Boeing doesn't own them, have exclusive rights, etc.

Quoting Glom (Reply 16):
Can they really just take engines designed for a Boeing product?

Yup. Just like the CFM56, CF6, Trent series, PW4000 series, etc... they can fly on whatever bird the aircraft manufactures fit them to.

The GeNX on the 787 will be slightly different from the GeNX on the A350, just like the A320 uses the CFM56-5 and the 737NG uses the CFM56-7


User currently offlineAdria From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7386 times:

Quoting KC135R (Reply 13):
You know you keep using this expression over and over again. How exactly is Boeing's back up against the wall? Here's the situation with the 787 - Boeing introduces it, Airbus initially counters with "the 787 will not be effective competition against the A330, we do not need to develop a new airplane to compete." Then, interest in the 787 grows so Airbus says "we will take the engines designed for the 787 and put them on the A330, efficiency will be matched close enough that we won't have to design a new airplane." Then sales begin to boom, so Airbus says "we will offer the A350, it will be an A330 derivative with a new wing, new engines, etc, etc" - but nobody buys it - well except Air Europa for 10 - so now they say "the A350 is constantly evolving, no longer an A330 derivative, it will be all new."

blablablablba.....if I write every such comment that Boeing made during the last 30 years when Airbus arrived then this would be a long night Smile


User currently offlineMark_D. From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 1447 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (8 years 11 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 7384 times:

Glom-- Didn't Boeing pay for their development in some way?

NAV20 was suggesting that too, in a reply to me a few weeks back. I don't know but not only at least to some extent I figure it's gotta be true but also I think it's sort of a nutty idea for Airbus to publicly float for their A350, unless they actually decide to have a go at making a bleedless jetliner themselves.

[Edited 2005-05-22 20:39:54]

25 EI321 : Dont make such stupid comments please. That would only be ultimatly considered if there was feedback from airlines that warrented it. Otherwise it wo
26 Sabenapilot : Technologically speaking, Airbus can match Boeings all composite fuselage, no doubt about that... they are proving so with the A400M already. Quite fr
27 Speedbird128 : How about A300=B767??? What good is a marketplace with no competition??
28 KC135R : Of course - they both use PR spin - and it will go back and forth and back and forth - between the two companies and between people on here. I listed
29 Post contains images Udo : Why not? They would be fools not to try as long as it's legal. How do you know HP/US won't have a use for a new longhaul aircraft in 2011? How ignora
30 Post contains images KC135R : BTW, did you ever notice that it was the engine manufacturers who pushed for bleedless engines. This argument is getting old from the Airbus-bigot cr
31 Glom : For crying out loud, it also the largest and most powerful.
32 Jeffrito : I only find mention of wing parts, control surfaces, etc. as composite components on the A400M. Could somebody point me to a discussion of the compos
33 Post contains images Mark_D. : KC135R-- I listed those specific comments, which are true - though paraphrased - to counter the "back against the wall" comment, specifically. Subpart
34 Beauing : The stupid comment was made by Airbus, when they made this suggestion. For Airbus this appears to be true. Boeing says they have solved the COST prob
35 Post contains images KC135R : Of course, I said it before - I am glad they stopped playing it safe, which got them nowhere, and are headed back more to the days of the 707 and 747
36 Mark_D. : KC135R--Boeing is doing it. Stick to the facts folks. Yeah, like Boeing sort of has its back up against a wall here and so doesn't have much choice in
37 Post contains images KC135R : Really, still??? It just goes to show, you can't reason with the unreasonable.
38 DfwRevolution : Well duh... I don't know of any combustors made of carbon laminate, but the main fan is one of the most stress-bearing components. It must withstand
39 2H4 : ...Can you provide some data to back up that proclamation? 2H4
40 Post contains images Mark_D. : KC135R-- and are headed back more to the days of the 707 and 747 - when risk taking is what made them what they are today. Generally I'd agree with th
41 KC135R : But you are assuming that will happen. As I pointed out before, there is no reason to doubt (based on historical facts) Boeing will deliver anything
42 Post contains images Mark_D. : KC135R--Really, still???    It just goes to show, you can't reason with the unreasonable. Hey, hey, easy. Relax, remember?! (especially given that y
43 Post contains images KC135R : Well, as my mother always said: if you put your mind to it you can do anything! Seriously, I would suspect that they would be able to. But, the quest
44 Post contains images Mark_D. : KC135R--But you are assuming that will happen. No KC135R, just pointing out there're major challenges is all (and mostly to folks around here who migh
45 2H4 : Yeah, neither can I, KC135R. I suppose they might be concerned about cultivating a "me too" corporate image, but I can't imagine this would outweigh
46 KC135R : Boeing was a failure in the commercial market prior to the 707 being introduced - it began their ascent to the top. Once they did gain ground, not on
47 Mark_D. : KC135-- What I can tell you is this, IMO, they probably can - but maybe they aren't quite there yet. There is some reason that they have such an avers
48 Post contains images Mark_D. : 2H4-- I suppose they might be concerned about cultivating a "me too" corporate image, but I can't imagine this would outweigh the benefits modern carb
49 DfwRevolution : Do you really think they are rolling the dice to that extent? By unanimous agreement and little hesitation, Boeing selected composite construction be
50 Mark_D. : KC135--Boeing was a failure in the commercial market prior to the 707 being introduced I shouldda really said "post-707EIS and 747 days" there, just t
51 2H4 : Mark D....until we hear a definitive explanation from Airbus, it's all speculation. Left field? Maybe, but I don't see any hard evidence supporting yo
52 Mark_D. : DfwRevolution-- Do you really think they are rolling the dice to that extent? Well nobody extent "what extent" that exactly might be yet but hey, thei
53 Post contains images Mark_D. : 2H4--until we hear a definitive explanation from Airbus, it's all speculation. Oh that it is! (and even there, who knows if those guys would be straig
54 Post contains images DfwRevolution : Never said there were no risks, but you are being incredibly nieve as to the degree of risk you think Boeing is taking. There are few people in the B
55 Post contains images 2H4 : Heh heh....oh, well....we may as well have fun with it. 2H4
56 Jeffrito : If the application of composites on the A400M and the 787 is essentially identical, and yet Airbus' chief engineers think composites will not offer t
57 Post contains images Mark_D. : DfwRevolution-- but you are being incredibly nieve as to the degree of risk you think Boeing is taking. There are few people in the Boeing camp losing
58 Aither : I'm sure Boeing will successfully build the composite fuselage. The have a lot of experience from their Washington financed military projects. Of cour
59 Beauing : If it's such a zany topic why do you keep posting to it? You have certainy done your part to keep it going...
60 Post contains links and images Mariner : I guess I must be missing something: http://www.compositesnews.com/cni.asp?articleID=8230 "Airbus has led the industry in the use of composites..." ma
61 Post contains images Mark_D. : Beauing-- If it's such a zany topic why do you keep posting to it? You have certainy done your part to keep it going... Because as I already pointed o
62 Sabenapilot : Did I ever say Boeing is not going to deliver what they promised? TECHNICALLY speaking, B will have equally few problems building a composite fuselag
63 DCAflyboy : What an ignorant comment. Some people just can't stand the fact that US Airways has survived and can now be real a comptetitor, both domestic and int
64 Beauing : Somehow this explanation doesn't quite ring true. Well, at least you're consistent...
65 Post contains images Mark_D. : DCAflyboy (Reply63) Oop, I guess the a.net software guys still got a bit of work to do fixing the quote feature and in particular getting the Reply #
66 A380900 : The cornerstone of the 787, the wingbox, is going to require a machine built in... France, by a supplier of... Airbus. The A380 wingbox is already in
67 KC135R : No, to be honest I do not. You want to know why? Consider the VLA argument - Boeing says there is little market for it (because they aren't offering
68 Post contains images Mark_D. : Beauing -- LOL! What a hoot
69 Post contains images KC135R : Well then it should be no problem to build right? So all this debate about whether it's a good idea is for nothing. If Airbus has mastered that, why
70 Post contains images EmmenezMoi : This guy is one hell of an analyst...
71 Mark_D. : KC135R-- Well then it should be no problem to build right? Not much more problem for them than for Boeing and its subcontractor folks, yup that's abou
72 Beauing : "The other guy's saying he can't do it. So let him say that," Frank Statkus of Boeing said. "He can't do it because he can't. We can do it because we
73 Ikramerica : To answer the 787 schedule question: Each Chinese airline is said to be getting a 787 BEFORE the 2008 Olympics to show off, which would indicate an in
74 MD-90 : Question: Is the A400M supposed to have a wound/spun fuselage like the Raytheon Premier 1 or 787? People have been building composite airplanes in the
75 A380900 : I mean who are you going to impress with a 787? As an airplane, it might be a breakthrough in many ways but we now know that it will look as yet anot
76 2H4 : Not everyone, but with the larger windows, probably more than you give Boeing credit for. 2H4
77 ComeAndGo : The tool used to manufacture the fuselage is Italian. Made by Alenia. I would wait for the paris air-show b4 coming to conclusions. A-bus has a tende
78 ComeAndGo : Those planes you talk about never saw the same operating environment that a 787 will see on a daily basis. While the kit plane might spend most of th
79 MrComet : Well....20 plus airlines is all the public Boeing needs. It's sales, Baby! The A400 is NOT a composite fuselage: From MachineDesign.com: "AIRFRAME AN
80 Beauing : Quoting ComeAndGo: The tool used to manufacture the fuselage is Italian. Made by Alenia. The Boeing executives found what they were looking for in the
81 Beauing : The only people who buy planes are the airlines. That's who you have to impress, and Boeing is doing a nice job of it with the 787. The general publi
82 Oldeuropean : Perhaps there is another question: Is Boeing able to built a composite fuselage? They just only predict to built one. But they haven`t built one alre
83 Post contains links ComeAndGo : Read this http://www.compositesworld.com/p/hpc/issues/2005/May/865 Although much of the technology used on the 787 is groundbreaking, what will be rem
84 MrComet : No one ever said it was. It's got Japanese wings, Russian design features, and lots of other foreign input and parts. Boeing won't make as much money
85 Post contains images Keesje : I think it is safe to asssume that if they where able to build the concorde 30 years ago, they would be able to produce composite fuselages if they th
86 Leelaw : The choice is most likely dictated by financial contraints, rather than a real preference for "superior" metal-alloy technologies.
87 Post contains images Sabenapilot : They have really sunk low then. Where has all the glory and pride of the company that once gave us the marvelous 747 gone? After reading that endless
88 DAYflyer : Airbus is going to have no choice but find out how to do this or be left behind IF the program Boeing has is very successful. If it flops, then Boein
89 Post contains images NumberTwelve : KC135, great respond. When we're talking about the boarding- and deboarding time of a 380 next, we will answer with your sentence Sabenapilot - Boein
90 Cruiser : The so-called World's Leading Airplane Manufacturer has told us many things. Just within the past two years, they said that there is no market for a
91 Sabenapilot : I am very interested to read a link in which you can show me Boeing has ever said there was URGENT need for a plane they were not offering, yet their
92 Keesje : Enlightening, we would nearly forget the 787 is the Boeings answer to the A330-200 that wiped out the B767.
93 Post contains links Jeffrito : Video: http://www.newairplane.com/en-US/FunStuff/Videos/787_Fuselage.htm Story: http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q1/nr_050111g.html
94 Oldeuropean : It was shown on German TV in a report about the 787. Axel
95 Post contains links Beauing : Are you aware of how much outsourceing Airbus does? It's been reported that half the content of the A380 is being produced in the US. They are contra
96 Scorpio : No they didn't. No it didn't. Next?
97 Cruiser : I never said that! Airbus banked on the Hub and Spoke approach. As a result, Airbus thought that Boeing's Point to Point model would not be the model
98 Mham001 : I think you grossly undersetimate the versitility of composite materials. I have seen and used composites in motorcycles and have been quite impresse
99 Beauing : Well I guess Airbus won't make much money on the A380, which is 50% American made.
100 Eilennaei : Please remember the Airbus freighter project is not affiliated with the U.S. DoD, the customer base consist of some very thrifty governments and mone
101 Post contains links ComeAndGo : For those who think Airbus is the only beneficiary of subsidies, read this. http://igeographer.lib.indstate.edu/pritchard.pdf
102 Cymro : So you wouldn't mind flying on a plane with a composite fuse that has just been filled!!!!.
103 ComeAndGo : would you drive a plastic car?
104 Cymro : How does this compare to flying at 40000ft in a dented fuse that has been filled to make it look good? Do we have a different taking on the meaning o
105 Daedaeg : I'm not sure about half. However I did read that their are more parts on the A380 from US suppliers than any other country, including France and Germ
106 Post contains links Cruiser : Sorry, let me reword that! I did mess it up: Airbus said that no response was needed when the 7e7 was first offered saying that the economics of the
107 Post contains links ComeAndGo : Here's a link with the suppliers for both birds: http://www.speednews.com/lists/A380_Suppliers.html http://www.speednews.com/lists/787_Suppliers.html
108 MrComet : You are right. But Boeing can't. Or they haven't. That is one of the reasons they haven't built anything in years. They are essentially risking the w
109 Scorpio : Well that's something entirely different than saying there is no market for a plane the size of the 787, isn't it? If this slogan is what you base yo
110 Scbriml : The Chicago Tribune should check its facts! Of course, being based in the same city as Boeing's HQ, may just have an influence on their reporting.
111 Sebolino : Sorry pal, wrong info. Buy another newspaper.
112 DAYflyer : Yes, I already have. It's called the Chevrolet Corvette. You may have heard of it. Gm has a lot of plastic body panels on many types of cars now, inc
113 Cruiser : I will give you that. However, if you still look at it, the 789 will be in an area where not many airliners will be. Call it a niche, or whatever you
114 MD-90 : And yet those people were able to build high performance aircraft, usually literally in their garages, from a set of plans and sheets of fiberglas, b
115 ComeAndGo : And … at what altitude do those planes fly? Are they compressed? So you're saying you know that the material will not change over time? The composi
116 ComeAndGo : the corvette is made of aluminum with plastic side panels. The saturn has plastic side panels as well. The frame is not made of plastic though.
117 Prebennorholm : They did already produce the graphite composite center wing box for the A380, which in many ways is a considerably more complicated structure than a
118 Areopagus : They did consider other materials, particularly aluminum-lithium. But, they said, Al-Li is a boutique material that will be used mainly in aerospace,
119 ComeAndGo : But if there is one inconsistency you have to throw away the whole part. that's not cheap.
120 Post contains images MD-90 : The Lancair IV-P is the highest performance 4-seat piston aircraft in the world. 330 mph cruise at 24,000 feet for 1550 sm is pretty high performance
121 2H4 : ComeAndGo....nobody's claiming the material will not change over time....just as nobody's claiming it is unbreakable. It's not 100% perfect in every
122 ComeAndGo : That's company PR. If you want the same from Boeing check their press releases. There's a Boeing employee hitting the fuselage with a hammer. So is i
123 2H4 : Why then aren't all newer business jets built out of aluminum? 2H4
124 Iwok : How about travelling at 202mph in a 2006 Corvette Z06? How about cruising at 40,000ft in a B2 bomber? How about going round the world in a carbon fib
125 Zvezda : I was also unable to discern any bubbles or creases in the video of the B787 test section fabrication.
126 Post contains images 2H4 : And indeed, the presence and detection of such flaws would be viewed as a success, and another manufacturing challenge addressed and overcome. Again,
127 Zvezda : Good point, 2H4. In my opinion, the revolutionary advances in airplanes have been: 1) the change from wood and fabric to aluminium and other metals,
128 ComeAndGo : Like the Dassault 7x Gulfstream 550 Bombardier Globalexpress and and and They're been used in case the tank blows up. It doesn't explode like metal t
129 ComeAndGo : Are you implying that the Boeing metal planes are all junk?
130 Post contains images Iwok : Boats have seen failures; mostly relatively low budget designs. Yes. What about the B2, which went through a full design cycle with hundreds of desig
131 ComeAndGo : The B2? At $1 Billion it better stays up there! The boat story is mixed. America's cup boats cost millions. Some of the round the world record settin
132 Post contains images 2H4 : You're missing the point. That there is even a single certified composite business jet proves that metal airframes can be improved upon. Frankly, thi
133 Post contains images 2H4 : A $6000 bicycle frame is very expensive, even in the context of modern, high-performance cycling frames. Furthermore, if you do a bit of studying and
134 ComeAndGo : Yes. So? Make it out of glass. The point was that MD-90 said that general aviation aircraft and performance aircraft are already made of composite ma
135 ComeAndGo : Live in the now? I believe it was steel not aluminum that carbon fiber is replacing in the bike world. 20 years in the making. So are we going to tes
136 MrComet : Maybe in France but not in this case. The article also attacks Boeing. But it isn't the Chicago Tribune saying it....its European government: "The tr
137 ComeAndGo : Check out the last post of Antores under topic "Bluster or for Real? Triple Digit Orders for A350" Apparently Boeing lost the 787 Singapore deal to A
138 Oldeuropean : Perhaps there is a difference between seeing this video on computer by Media Player or to see it on a TV-screen. Btw. I noticed that all links to the
139 Astuteman : I suspect stretching the point that Airbus had not repayed any A330 !!! loans up to 1997 (8 years ago??) into Airbus has repayed nothing back on any
140 MrComet : That There is a distinct shortage of information on this issue. Some freedom of information requests must be filed. However, I have not found any evid
141 DAYflyer : True enough. And the frame of the 787 will contain some aluminum as well. The aircraft even has a 5% steal content, according to Boeing.
142 Post contains images Scbriml : Why did they only steal 5% of it? And where from?
143 2H4 : ComeAndGo...did you not see my photos of the Raytheon Premier business jet? It utilizes a carbon airframe and has been in production for some time no
144 Areopagus : The sinking of an America's Cup yacht after cracking its hull is because, at that level of competition, the designers are cutting margins close to get
145 Post contains links ComeAndGo : Boeing is leapfrogging the industry or trying to. Many have doubts. Of course, diehard Boeing fans have no doubts that Boeing will succeed because Bo
146 ComeAndGo : In the race between A and B it's about performance advantages achieved with lighter materials. If the material does not prove its point as predicted
147 2H4 : Hmmm....yeeeeah, I don't remember seeing Hexcel Prepreg "anywhere else"... In fact, it has been flying for seven years. Look it up. Price and size ar
148 ComeAndGo : That has been known for years. So, is it used in the industry in question? Yes it is. When did we see the first examples of the material? In the '80.
149 2H4 : You are incorrect, sir. Remember the Raytheon Premier I've mentioned several times now? It has a carbon fiber composite fuselage. Not to mention all
150 ComeAndGo : Hexcel Prepreg used on Sailplanes ??? High Tech. WOW Boeing is using T800 carbon fiber the same it used on the 777 in the mid '90. That would make th
151 ComeAndGo : Yes but … The premier is a rather small plane that was introduced 4 years ago not 7. It certainly small in size and I wonder how that compares to a
152 ComeAndGo : It is shaky. And a large part of financial support is from two Japanese airlines who in turn like to buy Japanese. It is very possible that the 787 e
153 Post contains images 2H4 : No, according to my belief system, that would make the material 10 years old and obviously proven. Relax, take a deep breath, and accept the fact tha
154 NorCal : ComeAndGo- If no one ever took risks to develop new materials for a/c, then we would still have wood and cloth planes!!!! This is just the next step,
155 ComeAndGo : Either … 1 The plane falls apart in mid-air or 2 The fuselage skin on the 787 is made of aluminum like the A350. When Lotus built their first sport
156 Post contains images Iwok : Many graphite composite airplanes have been in the air, or under test since the 70's (F117, B2 etc.) BTW, your use of the word "plastic" is incorrect
157 ComeAndGo : America's Cup boats are sold and reused all the time. Some of the boats go through four years of training, one year of disqualification races and eve
158 Trex8 : I have no clue if A can build a composite fuselage but there is a track record for Mitsubishi having significant problems making the composite wingbox
159 DAYflyer : I think that Airbus is fully capable of launching such a program. However, they lack the will to do so at this time.
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...
When Is Airbus Going To Update Their Website? posted Sun Nov 12 2006 05:40:44 by Dougloid
Is Airbus Beginning To Slip A Little Bit? posted Fri Mar 31 2006 06:04:21 by AviationAddict
How Is Airbus Going To Compete With The 7E7? posted Sat Jun 12 2004 02:25:55 by BoeingBus
SIA Says Airbus To Build The 787-9 For Them posted Wed Nov 8 2006 03:10:54 by Jimyvr
AFX: Airbus To Build Additional Model Of A350 posted Mon Aug 28 2006 09:35:21 by SFORunner
Chinese May Ask Airbus To Build Factory In Tianjin posted Sun May 28 2006 15:12:09 by Leelaw
How To Build An Airbus A380 In 7 Mins (video) posted Fri Apr 7 2006 11:10:15 by B777A340Fan
Airbus To Build Planes In China posted Thu Mar 16 2006 18:20:13 by TinkerBelle
How To Build An Airbus A380 In About 7 Mins posted Fri Mar 10 2006 18:01:16 by JHSfan
A320NG To Have 'all-composite' Fuselage-wings posted Thu Apr 21 2005 19:59:53 by YUL332LX