Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What If The A380 Had NOT Been Built  
User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 14 hours ago) and read 3904 times:

What if Airbus had NOT built the A380? What if they had just decided to keep their powder dry and wait to see what Boeing was up to?

What would the competitive landscape look like today?

Would Boeing still have built the 787?

If so, what would Airbus have countered with?
A composite fuselage plane similar to the 787?
Or would they have gone with a large twin to directly challenge the 777?
Or would they still have gone with the A380?

14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 977 posts, RR: 51
Reply 1, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3863 times:

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):

Would Boeing still have built the 787?

More than likely, yes. The progression of the 787 from the Yellowstone studies of 1998-2000 is obvious, and Boeing always new the product cylce of the 767 was going to end 20-30 years after its 1981 EIS.

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):
A composite fuselage plane similar to the 787?

Not in the immediate future. I do not believe Airbus was planning for the A330 product cycle to end quite so soon, the A350 is a reaction.


Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):
Or would they have gone with a large twin to directly challenge the 777?

No, Airbus chose it's 777 competitor in 1998 with the launch of the A340-500/600.

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):
Or would they still have gone with the A380?

I imagine so. The A380 superjumbo has long been part of Airbus strategy to create an entire product line, specifically eclipsing the 747.


User currently offlineDogfighter2111 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 1968 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3834 times:

I think Boeing would continue the B748 project, the B787 project and the B777LR project.

After all, if there wasn't an A380 then there'd be someone else to build one.

Thanks
Mike


User currently offlineGrantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3819 times:

I have been wondering something similar. I think Boeing would have done what they are doing regardless. But I think that Airbus, with one large project already underway, tried to take a cheap route to competing with the 787 by reengining the A330. When that failed to excite the market, the ended up undertaking a more ambitious derivative of the A330. Was that the right move? Should the A330 have become the competitor for the 787? After all, the A330 still sells well and really doesn't need to be replaced yet. I think a better move would have been to develop the A330 as a better competitor to the entire 777 lineup - displacing the A340 which is falling out of favor. And then, separately, building a true replacement for the A300/A310 that would directly compete with the 787. That way, the A330/A340 producton line would be focused on competing with the 777 and a separate production line could compete with the 787. Both aircraft would be better sized for their markets and they would have twice the production capability.

With the current makeup - the A380 is too big and costly, the A350 is either too big or too small, the A340 has too many engines, and the A300/A310 are too old. The only well positioned widebody in their lineup is the A330 and that is being replaced.


User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3802 times:

I would have thought they would have gone with the biggest composite twin they could build to counter the 777, since the A340 doesn't compete very well in this segment anymore.

User currently offlineAseem From India, joined Feb 2005, 2046 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 13 hours ago) and read 3796 times:

for sure the B744Adv or B748 project as you call wouldn't have materialized.
rgds
VT-ASJ



ala re ala, VT-ALA ala
User currently offlineBG777300ER From Bulgaria, joined Mar 2005, 260 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 3628 times:

Quoting Aseem (Reply 5):
sure the B744Adv or B748 project as you call wouldn't have materialized.

I agree, even though many people say that the 748 was not built as a DIRECT competitor, it was still built (in my opinion) to take away some sales from the A380. In other words, it was built to earn the market of customers who needed something bigger than the 747 but inside thought the A380 might be a little too big for them but were thinking of getting the A380 because no alternative big plane was present (if this sentence makes any sense at all). No matter what people say, the 748 was a reaction to the A380.

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):
Would Boeing still have built the 787?

Yes, it's unrelated to the A380.

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):
If so, what would Airbus have countered with?

I think airbus would've built a composite and reengined twin (basically the A350 still) that would've been what it is now. But I think they would've made models of it that would've infringed on the upper part of the 787 market (in terms of passengers) and the lower part of the 777 market (especially the 772 market). In other words, they would've built a plane that would take away customers who thought the 787 was too small and the 777-300 too big.



Koi mi sra v gashtite?
User currently offlineAirPortugal310 From Tokelau, joined Apr 2004, 3641 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3591 times:

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):
What if Airbus had NOT built the A380?

Then this thread would have never existed...



I sell airplanes and airplane accessories
User currently offlineKeta From Germany, joined Mar 2005, 448 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3571 times:

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
No, Airbus chose it's 777 competitor in 1998 with the launch of the A340-500/600

But that's because they had the A380 program. Maybe, if the A380 had not been there, they'd have made a new competitor for the 777.



Where there's a will, there's a way
User currently offlineAither From South Korea, joined Oct 2004, 858 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3553 times:

Why ? the A330/A340 family was born in the early 90s and showed it is capable to compete with the 777.


Never trust the obvious
User currently offlineMarshalN From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2005, 1521 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 3520 times:

Quoting Aither (Reply 9):
Why ? the A330/A340 family was born in the early 90s and showed it is capable to compete with the 777.

I agree

I also think the 748 would not have shown up. We'll still be stuck with the 744, and possibly with 744 having more orders. I think there is a market for VLA though, and somebody at some point would've jumped the gun.


User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2826 posts, RR: 42
Reply 11, posted (8 years 10 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3443 times:

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):
What if Airbus had NOT built the A380? What if they had just decided to keep their powder dry and wait to see what Boeing was up to?

I suspect that Boeing would have pushed another iteration of the 747. I do not think that it would be anywhere near as large as the A380, but it certainly would have a new wing, and a lot of the design features that made it int hte A380 (bleedless engines most probably).

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):

No, Airbus chose it's 777 competitor in 1998 with the launch of the A340-500/600.

I would have loved to be a fly on the wall for that conversation. The number of 777s to 340s definitly are so lobsided that one wonders if there was anything Airbus could have done to more efficently challange the 777.

Quoting Aither (Reply 9):
Why ? the A330/A340 family was born in the early 90s and showed it is capable to compete with the 777.

The A330 competed more directly against the 767 and 757, not the 777. To that end it did it's job well putting the 757 in the graveyard. Now the 787 will do the same to the A330 and the 346 will continue to be outsold dramatically versus the 777.

I really think Airbus's focus on the A3XX late in the 90s hurt the 346. I suspect that we would not be looking at large orders for the 777 in former Airbus stronghold (EK an CX) in particular if these planes had the same focus the A3XX did.


User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 10 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 3242 times:

Quoting AirPortugal310 (Reply 7):
Then this thread would have never existed...

LOL!


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31003 posts, RR: 86
Reply 13, posted (8 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3100 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The A3XX was first announced around the end of 1996. I believe the B745 and B746 proposals were announced around the same time?

So if the A380 program had never been launched, I imagine Boeing would have still offered a 745/746, and those programs probably would have gained traction, since they filled the same need as the A380 does (just not as well, in the minds of the airlines, which is why they went with the A380).

Boeing would have launched the 772LR, just because Airbus had the A345. Yes, it's a "nice" market, but with the 772F, Boeing knew they could make money on the program.

The 787 would have happened, and probably about as quickly. The A330 really hammered the 767 into the ground, so Boeing had to come up with something. With the airlines making money hand over fist, the Sonic Cruiser still would have been offered first - but as a way to blunt the A330 instead of the A380. When what happened...happened...Boeing would have moved from the SC to the 787.

Airbus would be replying with the A350, of course, and working on an A340-600NG (with more composites and A350 engines) I imagine to blunt the 777-300ER and (maybe) 747-400/500 programs.


User currently offlineAirPacific747 From Denmark, joined May 2008, 2409 posts, RR: 24
Reply 14, posted (8 years 10 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3090 times:

Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter):

glad to see you have an objective point of view this time  Wink


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...
What If The B747 Had Never Been Built? Imagine! posted Mon Oct 29 2001 04:45:07 by Lax
What If The 717 Had An MD88/2 Flight Deck Instead? posted Wed Dec 26 2001 01:38:52 by JetBlue320
What If The Boeing 2707 Was Built? posted Wed May 31 2006 19:29:35 by 747400sp
If The Concorde Had Been A Success... posted Thu Mar 9 2006 04:49:47 by AndesSMF
The A380 Is Not Dead. posted Mon Sep 25 2006 11:37:36 by CHRISBA777ER
What If The Price Of Oil Continues To Rise? posted Mon Jul 17 2006 20:29:22 by FLY2LIM
How Can You Order If The Design Is Not Clear? posted Wed Apr 26 2006 13:23:24 by Art
What Is The "DO NOT Touch?" Jetway Wheel? posted Thu Jan 12 2006 22:05:45 by KELPkid
What If The "Big 6" Failed? posted Wed Aug 10 2005 17:25:39 by 7E72004
The Last 343 Has Been Built....maybe posted Fri Jun 24 2005 06:17:54 by Yyz717
What If DL Still Had Its DFW Hub? posted Sun Jan 31 2010 13:29:47 by CIDflyer
What If The 737 & 747 Weren't Grandfathered? posted Tue Oct 2 2007 18:35:29 by Luv2cattlecall
Believe Or Not, The A380 Is Not A Runway Hog! posted Sat Jun 23 2007 05:19:15 by 747400sp
Hypothesis: What If The Government Shut Down Am? posted Mon Jun 4 2007 06:43:54 by Jopavon
What If The Aircraft Is 20 Minutes Late? posted Fri Apr 27 2007 12:02:40 by Spantax
The A380 Is Not Dead. posted Mon Sep 25 2006 11:37:36 by CHRISBA777ER