Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts  
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 4088 times:

According to this article, the A-350 has been totally redone and will only retain 10% of the parts of the A-330. This statement is near the end of the article:

http://money.iwon.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt...eed=dji&date=20050608&cat=INDUSTRY

The A350 that's being offered to airlines now will be a virtually all-new aircraft, and only about 10% of the A330's components will be retained. Cockpit commonality with other members of the Airbus wide-body range will ensure that training costs will be minimized.

Airbus reckons that the break-even point for the A350 is somewhere between 400 and 500 aircraft. But industry analysts said that probably the main reason behind the EADS statement Wednesday is to clear the air going into next week's air show.


[Edited 2005-06-08 23:16:53]


One Nation Under God
38 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4072 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Thread starter):
Cockpit commonality with other members of the Airbus wide-body range will ensure that training costs will be minimized.

At this point, they are at no more advantage than Boeing with 777 to 787 conversion time.

Quoting DAYflyer (Thread starter):
The A350 that's being offered to airlines now will be a virtually all-new aircraft, and only about 10% of the A330's components will be retained.

And yet only $5 billion dollars? Talk about pinching pennies to 90% of a widebody airplane of this magnitude. The 787 is tipping the scale at $8 billion plus additional RD...


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4055 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
And yet only $5 billion dollars? Talk about pinching pennies to 90% of a widebody airplane of this magnitude. The 787 is tipping the scale at $8 billion plus additional RD...

Interesting observation. I wonder if it includes the $3.5 B they are seeking for launch aid.

I wonder if the 787 is more expensive as a result of more composites and other new technologies, possible because of GLARE being cheaper??



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21588 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 4018 times:

or more expensive because it is real and not a morphing product right now.


Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently onlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5052 posts, RR: 44
Reply 4, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3990 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
I wonder if it includes the $3.5 B they are seeking for launch aid.

Where did you get that number? They're looking for $1.5 - $2 billion, as in a third of the total cost, not $3.5. And this is included in the $ 5 billion.


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 3964 times:

1 part probably is the airframe

User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4880 posts, RR: 14
Reply 6, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3869 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
or more expensive because it is real and not a morphing product right now.

the 787 is a totally new design, every part is designed from scratch , the A350 in whatever guise it eventually ends up as could still use the basic design of the A330 for many structures, even if the parts are made of different materials and have some minor changes in dimension, they are not having to reinvent everything from zero. it may well be that only 10% of parts is interchangeable with a A330 but that does;'t mean 90% of the drawings are totally different or need new production jigs etc, that saves you lots of $$$!


User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4417 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3775 times:

All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...


Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 8, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 3586 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):

At this point, they are at no more advantage than Boeing with 777 to 787 conversion time.



Quoting Avek00 (Reply 7):
All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...

The A350 would still have a small advantage in spare parts commonality.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):

And yet only $5 billion dollars? Talk about pinching pennies to 90% of a widebody airplane of this magnitude. The 787 is tipping the scale at $8 billion plus additional RD...

I haven't heard of any new technologies being developed for the A350. The B787, on the other hand, is pioneering two major advances in aviation technology (composite fuselage and bleedless systems). One would expect the B787 to have significantly higher R&D costs than the A350. The payoff for Boeing is that the B787 should be significantly less expensive to manufacture and to operate.


User currently offlineGlacote From France, joined Jun 2005, 409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (9 years 6 months 3 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 3388 times:

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 7):
All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...



Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
The A350 would still have a small advantage in spare parts commonality.

Spare parts and most of all pilot qualification and training. Please.


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8041 posts, RR: 5
Reply 10, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3273 times:

In that case, the cost of R&D for the A350 will now officially zoom through the roof. I wouldn't be surprised that the A350 development costs reach the €7-€8 billion range, and EADS shareholders won't stand for that!  no 

User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3260 times:

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 4):
Where did you get that number? They're looking for $1.5 - $2 billion, as in a third of the total cost, not $3.5. And this is included in the $ 5 billion.

Thank you, that was a typo. I hit the 3 instead of the 1. I am aware of the correct figure. Sorry about that!



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3241 times:

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 6):
the 787 is a totally new design, every part is designed from scratch , the A350 in whatever guise it eventually ends up as could still use the basic design of the A330 for many structures, even if the parts are made of different materials and have some minor changes in dimension, they are not having to reinvent everything from zero. it may well be that only 10% of parts is interchangeable with a A330 but that does;'t mean 90% of the drawings are totally different or need new production jigs etc, that saves you lots of $$$!



Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
I haven't heard of any new technologies being developed for the A350. The B787, on the other hand, is pioneering two major advances in aviation technology (composite fuselage and bleedless systems). One would expect the B787 to have significantly higher R&D costs than the A350. The payoff for Boeing is that the B787 should be significantly less expensive to manufacture and to operate.

Thank you for those excellent perspectives on the savings of the aircraft development costs.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3210 times:

Does a slightly improved component (LDG, APU) with a different part/ dash number count as a new part?

If so the book on "lying with statistics" has a new chapter.


User currently offlinePlanefreakaa From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 111 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3199 times:

how can airbus develope 2 aircraft at the same time......oooohhh yea, government loans/gifts.
im an idiot, i forgot about those things...


User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2821 posts, RR: 10
Reply 15, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3180 times:

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 14):
how can airbus develope 2 aircraft at the same time......oooohhh yea, government loans/gifts.
im an idiot, i forgot about those things...

Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 16, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3175 times:

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 14):
how can airbus develope 2 aircraft at the same time......oooohhh yea, government loans/gifts.
im an idiot, i forgot about those things...

Yes you are. What 2 aircraft are currently being developed?

Do you forget Boeing developing the 747-400, 767, 757, and 737-300 all at the same time?

N


User currently offlineSNATH From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 3247 posts, RR: 22
Reply 17, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3166 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 15):
Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.

Didn't they also develop the B757 and B767 at the same time too?

Tony



Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 3068 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 15):
Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.

Yes, and they also almost bankrupted themselves in the process. 3 distinct programs at the same time is a substantial drain.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8663 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2998 times:

Holy cow, this surely must be a new record. It took only one post to turn a thread about the A350 into a thread about the 787.

User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2982 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
The A350 would still have a small advantage in spare parts commonality.

Like what??? Lav seats and reading light bulbs???

fluffy


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21588 posts, RR: 59
Reply 21, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2952 times:

Quoting Glacote (Reply 9):
Spare parts and most of all pilot qualification and training. Please.

787 is supposed to be similar to 777 for pilots, no?

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 20):
Like what??? Lav seats and reading light bulbs???

interior fixtures don't count, do they?



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3601 posts, RR: 66
Reply 22, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2934 times:

Quoting Glom (Reply 15):
Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
Do you forget Boeing developing the 747-400, 767, 757, and 737-300 all at the same time?

Let's get the timing right on these programs.

727 EIS: 1965
731 EIS: 1968
741 EIS: 1970
762 EIS: 1982
752 EIS: 1983
733 EIS: 1985
744 EIS: 1989

There was a slight overlap between the 731 and the 741, but the only two Boeing models that were really developed concurrently were the 762 and 752. Timing on the other programs allowed shifting of the design resources so competition for those resources was kept to a minimum.

Airbus has the same opportunity on the A388 and A358 since engineers needed for initial design work on the A358 probably will not be needed on the A388 now unless testing identifies need for major changes.

Money might still be a challenge though.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineN60659 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 654 posts, RR: 24
Reply 23, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 2900 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 22):
There was a slight overlap between the 731 and the 741, but the only two Boeing models that were really developed concurrently were the 762 and 752.

Well wasn't there a fairly large overlap between the 741 and the B2707, although the latter never saw the light of day.

-N60659



Nec Dextrorsum Nec Sinistrorsum
User currently offlineJoost From Netherlands, joined Apr 2005, 3188 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (9 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2870 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 13):
If so the book on "lying with statistics" has a new chapter.

Aren't there lies, damn lies and statistics?

Of course it depends on what you define as different or equal. When a component is only slightly changed but not interexchangable with the 330 anymore, it's different. What is mostly says, is that part commonality obviously is less important than perfect-match-for-the-product.


25 B2707SST : Yes, there were up to 3,000 engineers working on the B2707 in the mid-to-late 1960s, with activity ramping up after Boeing won the contract at the en
26 N60659 : Prompting the billboard - "Would the last person leaving Seattle please turn out the lights" or something close to that. Great summary B2707SST !!! -
27 GQfluffy : Guess you didn't see the sarcasm dripping off your screen. No, I don't think interiors count... fluffy
28 Post contains links and images B2707SST : Yep, 1971 was not a good time in Seattle. In fact, the city even draped an anti-suicide net below the Space Needle. SST employees get their layoff no
29 OldAeroGuy : Agreed, as well documented by B2707SST. However, there were two big differences: 1) Most of the SST R&D money was being provided by the FAA, also des
30 Avek00 : Probably wrong on both counts: 1. The 350 will likely have greater spare parts commonality with the 787 or even 777 when all is said and done. 2. The
31 Monteycarlos : Well its only the case for the 777 and 787, and the 764 to 777... Airbus has it across almost all types. The costs are not finalised in any case. Don
32 Post contains images Zeekiel : 10% of parts. Interesting. So if the A330 hypothetically had 1000 parts the A350 would inherit 100 parts if my maths hasn't exploded in my brain. Of c
33 AirbusCanada : Boeing anticipated that they would need substantial earnings from the 747 to fund SST tooling-up and production in the early 1970s, which were to be f
34 TrevD : Serious ??
35 BigB : Most of the 757/767 studies happened thoughout the late 70's because they were slated to be 727-300. Read about UAL and the 727-300. The 737 classics
36 Keesje : R&D and maintenance cost for a slightly different part are a different story than an all new part... Nice backgrounds on the SST..
37 B2707SST : It is almost certain that Boeing could not have paid for SST production expenses out of pocket during the early 1970s. That said, if the project had
38 Trex8 : FWIW I was glancing through that FI article about the A345/6 airline experience from early May and the A345/6 only has 30% parts commonality with the
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...
Air NZ To Lease 10 Of 15 A320s posted Thu Dec 12 2002 22:23:17 by Flyingbronco05
AF Ready To Buy 10% Of AZ In The Next Days posted Thu Mar 7 2002 15:13:33 by Airblue
Airbus To Dump 8 Out Of 10 Suppliers? posted Tue Nov 7 2006 03:07:16 by Dougloid
U.S. Approves Sale Of Airplane Parts To Iran posted Wed Oct 11 2006 15:53:04 by Clickhappy
DaimlerChrysler To Retain At Least 15% Of EADs posted Wed Apr 12 2006 20:12:40 by Leelaw
JAL RFP To Order 10 To 15 CRJ Or E-JETS posted Fri Nov 17 2006 13:12:45 by PanAm_DC10
Eads In Talks To Sell Part Of Airbus posted Thu Nov 16 2006 07:41:00 by N1786b
Eads In Talks To Sell Part Of Airbus posted Thu Nov 16 2006 07:39:44 by N1786b
Emirates, First To Allow Use Of Mobile Phones! posted Wed Nov 8 2006 09:10:31 by QatarA340
NW Bids Adieu To DC-10 posted Tue Oct 31 2006 15:02:30 by Solnabo