Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Seating Capacity Of A350 And 787 Exaggerated?  
User currently offlineColumbia107 From Gibraltar, joined Aug 2004, 358 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7921 times:

Boeing's Randy Baseler, vice president of marketing for Boeing commercial airplanes, said in a conference call today that Boeing had no immediate plans to start offering a larger version of its 787 in response to the A350, saying Airbus was "exaggerating the seat count" on its newest jet.

Is this correct?

Is the largest A350 model to seat 300 + passengers, compared with 296 on the largest 787 Dreamliner?

Are not such figures in 777 territory?


In God we trust
7 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCrosswind From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 2598 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7890 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The their latest 787 Airplane Desription Document (Revision E) Boeing lists the following "standardised" layouts;

B787-3
293 pax - 24F (6 abreast/2-2-2/50" pitch) 269Y (9 abreast/3-3-3/32" pitch)

B787-8
256 pax - 30C (6 abreast/2-2-2/52" pitch) 226Y (8 abreast/2-4-2/32" pitch)
275 pax - 30C (6 abreast/2-2-2/52" pitch) 245Y (9 abreast/3-3-3/32" pitch)

B787-9
300 pax - 36C (6 abreast/2-2-2/52" pitch) 264Y (8 abreast/2-4-2/32" pitch)
320 pax - 36C (6 abreast/2-2-2/52" pitch) 284Y (9 abreast/3-3-3/32" pitch)

In the recent presentation for the ACI-NA Thechical Affars Committee Airbus showed the following "standardised" layouts for the A350;

A350-800
258 pax - 36C (6 abreast/2-2-2/60" pitch) 222Y (8 abreast/2-4-2/32" pitch)

A350-900
316 pax - 36C (6 abreast/2-2-2/60" pitch) 280Y (8 abreast/2-4-2/32" pitch)

Seems fairly closely matched if you ask me - if anything, based on the above, the seat-count Boeing show for the 787 is slightly exaggerated as 52" pitch in C is now below-standard for a long-haul premium cabin.

Regards
CROSSWIND


User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 2, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7885 times:

There was a pdf file about the A350 posted on here some time ago comparing the 772ER to the A350-900. The problem with it was that the A350-900 seating capacity was quoted in a 2 class layout compared to the 772ER which had a three class layout giving the A359 similar capacity to the 772ER. I'm sure there had to have been some mistake b/c airlines who obviously know more than we do wouldn't have been fooled by this inflated seat count. I think the only fair comparisons between the a/c would be the cabin floor area as manufacturers tend to skew seat counts.

User currently offlineB2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1369 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7880 times:

Airbus tends to include a noticeably higher proportion of economy seats and fewer business and first seats in their reference configurations than Boeing, leading to a relatively higher seat count for Airbus. Based on the way most airlines configure their planes, Boeing's configurations are usually more "real world" than Airbus', although even Boeing's are too high in many cases.

In any case, this is purely a PR issue. No airline in the world is dumb enough to take Boeing and Airbus' standard configurations at face value. Each airline will model its own seat configurations on candidate aircraft and come to its own decision on which is most appropriate for its needs.

--B2707SST



Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7876 times:

Quoting Columbia107 (Thread starter):
Is this correct?

High capacity on the 787 assumes 9 abreast in coach which provides the same comfort level of the A-350. Standard capacity provides a whole new level in comfort.

Here's a Boeing presentation that addresses the issue, page 65:


http://www.boeing.com/nosearch/exec_pres/China.pdf


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7829 times:

For a reliable long haul comparison between the 787 and a350

- 8 abreast 32 inch for economy,
- 6 abreast 60 inch business,
- 4 abreast 80 inch first

C: ~15% of available seats, F : ~5%

seems realistic at this moment.

A lavatory rate of 1-30 and sufficient galley & crew rest should be taken as a reference.

Other "typical" configurations are mistifying & unrealistic IMO and many time leads to strange wisdoms here at a.net.


User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 7784 times:

Quoting Crosswind (Reply 1):
Seems fairly closely matched if you ask me - if anything, based on the above, the seat-count Boeing show for the 787 is slightly exaggerated as 52" pitch in C is now below-standard for a long-haul premium cabin.

Even if you move to 60" removing 6 F/C seats from the 787 (you have about 300" to work with between L1 and L2 doors - unless revision E changes this) it nets you 30F in 2+2+2 at 60" and 226 in 2+4+2 (Net 256 seats) 6 additional seats in the 350-800 and a known poorer fuel performance from the same engine with bleed air and a heavier airframe will never offset the price tag difference of nearly $30-40 Million for the 350-800 vs. the 787-8.

For the -8 CO and NW have demonstrated the target seating is 240 in a two class arrangement so it's relative to the buyer more than anything else. That said, adjustments would be made to the 350 layout as well meaning it's more likely a 350-800 would seat the same number of pax as the 330-200 in a "normal airline configuration", plus or minus a couple of seats.

The A350-900, based on it's cabin length can add about 16 more seats in Y over a standard 330-300 in a typical configuration assuming the airline wants to maintain the same level of comfort available and amenities available in the 330-300. The -800 deletes (from the 332) the lav near the R-2 door as well as the Galley at the L2/R2 location and replaces that with seats and what appears to be a bar and a "mini" lav behind the center seats in the last row of the forward cabin.

It all boils down to the airline in the end, but in a nutshell, the numbers are exagerated by Airbus somewhat because cabin amenties have been removed to provide additional seats, amenities that most airlines would want to maintain from the 332/333. If that happens, you have an A350-800 that is almost a foot shorter than it's cousin the 330-200 and an A350-900 that is only 4 feet longer than it's cousin the 330-300.


User currently offlineSlarty From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 342 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 7657 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 4):
High capacity on the 787 assumes 9 abreast in coach which provides the same comfort level of the A-350. Standard capacity provides a whole new level in comfort.

Here's a Boeing presentation that addresses the issue, page 65:


http://www.boeing.com/nosearch/exec_...a.pdf

Excellent point. The floor area figures (if they are accurate) clearly show Airbus is playing "fast and furious" with their PAX counts.


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...
Major Differences Between A350 And 787 posted Tue Sep 12 2006 07:36:45 by Dallasnewark
Thai Steps Up A350 And 787 Evaluations posted Mon Aug 7 2006 18:08:53 by Leelaw
Lufthansa Not Satisfied With A350 And 787 posted Mon May 8 2006 21:31:40 by Columba
A350 And 787 On The German Market? posted Sat Apr 22 2006 11:40:33 by Columba
EK: A350 And 787 Both Require Design Changes posted Wed Nov 23 2005 17:55:29 by N328KF
Aeroflot To Choose Between A350 And 787 Next Week posted Fri Oct 28 2005 11:38:38 by Keesje
Seating Capacity of Delta Aircraft? posted Wed Jun 1 2005 03:52:16 by Delta07
Seating Capacity Of A 747? posted Mon Jan 29 2001 13:26:17 by Airmale
Eithad Looking At 787/A350 And 777F/A332F posted Tue Aug 8 2006 11:16:45 by EI321
Airline Seating Capacity (1980's And Today) posted Sun Mar 12 2006 01:31:42 by TheFlyGuy2