Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A350 Needs To Be Competitive With 787  
User currently offlineAeroPiggot From United States of America, joined May 2005, 283 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 7625 times:

Comments from Launch Customer US airways, states that the A350 Needs To Be Competitive With the 787. Again another Airbus Customer pushing them to change the A350 design. You must subscribe to Aviation Daily to view the link below.

http://www.aviationnow.com/publicati...e+With+787%2C+Says+Launch+Customer


A scientist discovers that which exists, an engineer creates that which never was.
45 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9196 posts, RR: 20
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7567 times:

If US feels that the A350 will not compete with the 787, could US change their mind and order the 787? I believe that US is considering all options for future aircraft. I do remember saying something about an all-Airbus fleet, but USPIT10L informed me otherwise on a different thread and that they are looking at both Boeing AND Airbus for future aircraft...


Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineUSPIT10L From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 3295 posts, RR: 7
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 7539 times:

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 1):
If US feels that the A350 will not compete with the 787, could US change their mind and order the 787? I believe that US is considering all options for future aircraft. I do remember saying something about an all-Airbus fleet, but USPIT10L informed me otherwise on a different thread and that they are looking at both Boeing AND Airbus for future aircraft...

That would be correct, Steeler83. I heard that from FCYTravis on a previous thread. Parker stated that if the A350 doesn't like up to the "hype" or perfrom as expected, they would go with the 787 long-term. Good to see US exploring all options.



It's a Great Day for Hockey!
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5752 posts, RR: 47
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 7442 times:

Wow that would be a change for US..they more or less vowed not to buya nother Boeing aricraft again after the 737 crashes. But if they get the right airplane then I guess they would be willing to swallow their pride and order from Boeing.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9196 posts, RR: 20
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 7385 times:

Quoting USPIT10L (Reply 2):
Good to see US exploring all options.

Like the saying, "Don't put all your eggs in one basket..."

Don't put all your pax on one plane...  Wink

Sorry, that one probably was not a good application of that saying was it?  Wink Big grin



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 7327 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 3):
Wow that would be a change for US..they more or less vowed not to buya nother Boeing aricraft again after the 737 crashes. But if they get the right airplane then I guess they would be willing to swallow their pride and order from Boeing.

I always figured US Air's new leadership from America West should be able to put past issues with Boeing aside. The only thing that would hold them back would be any contractual and financial obligations to Airbus. I do remember US/HP indicating that the A350 deal would be contingent on the competitiveness of the A350 versus the 787. Just another thing for Airbus to mull over in considering the future of the A350.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2826 posts, RR: 42
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 7320 times:

The other thing to remember is that Airbus and US's deal for the A350 explictly had terms in the contract to let US off the hook if the 350 is not competitive with the 787. If US actually utilizes that clause, there will be a deeply unhappy Airbus given the post-bankuptcy loans they provided US.

User currently offlineAeroPiggot From United States of America, joined May 2005, 283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 7299 times:

Quote:
AirFrnt: The other thing to remember is that Airbus and US's deal for the A350 explictly had terms in the contract to let US off the hook if the 350 is not competitive with the 787. If US actually utilizes that clause, there will be a deeply unhappy Airbus given the post-bankuptcy loans they provided US.

Don't forget that Airbus gave/loan US/HP a few million dallars...with strings attached I would bet??



A scientist discovers that which exists, an engineer creates that which never was.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21571 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 7246 times:

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 4):
Like the saying, "Don't put all your eggs in one basket..."

Don't put all your pax on one plane...

I didn't realize US had ordered A380s....  Smile

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineRIHNOSAUR From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 362 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 7179 times:

hello,

I do not want to start an A vs B thing here..(doomed if I say it ...doomed if i don't), and I am still quite new to A.net, but I keep reading all this controversy with the uncompetitivenesss of the A350 vs the 787.

with all honesty I would like to know what is the "main reason" why this is so...
I am sure it all boils down to some efficiency aspect, because this translates to profits, but could some one in a concise way point to what specific feature greatly outperforms the A350??
also I am sure there are probably many factors that add up to an overall advantage....

Not to long ago, a Boeing engineer came for a career fair to my school and presented a talk on the 787, very impressive by the way. What stood out was the 787 range per fuel per kilogram... mainly due to the use in composites...
are these same features that bad on the A350...?
there is a lot of talk about the A350 cross section....how does this play a role in fuel efficiency...?? if at all...is the passenger comfort the issue???

thanks.

once again these are honest questions with no intent in starting controversy, I would like to add that the A330 is my favorite bird (just in case).
 Big grin  Big grin  Wink



particles and waves are the same thing, but who knows what that thing is...
User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9196 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 7122 times:

Quoting Mir (Reply 8):
I didn't realize US had ordered A380s....

Ok, so my little funny there has morphed into another A380 joke... Why don't I think of these things???  Smile  banghead 



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 6956 times:

Quoting AeroPiggot (Thread starter):
Comments from Launch Customer US airways, states that the A350 Needs To Be Competitive With the 787

You order a plane, then complain a year later that it's not good enough???

If the A350 is that inferior, why buy it in the first place???



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6858 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 11):
You order a plane, then complain a year later that it's not good enough???

You should ask Mr. Udvar-Hazy of ILFC the same question. He "dropped the dime" on the A350 a few weeks after making a follow-on order for 4 aircraft.

[Edited 2006-04-29 14:20:21]

User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6824 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 11):
If the A350 is that inferior, why buy it in the first place???

The suspicion is growing on me that a lot of people signed up on the basis of a 'prospectus' saying that the A350's performance would be broadly comparable to that of the 787; and now they're finding out, or at least suspecting, that it will fall a long way short.

If that turns out to be the case, the contracts will be voidable at their option.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineKaneporta1 From Greece, joined May 2005, 739 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 6816 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 11):
You order a plane, then complain a year later that it's not good enough???

If the A350 is that inferior, why buy it in the first place???

The A350 is not inferior to the 787. Like some airlines have said, the 2 airplanes are almost equal. I think the point customers are trying to make is, if something based on the A330 can be as good as the 787, why not go all new and make something much better than the 787?



I'd rather die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather, not terrified and screaming, like his passengers
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6803 times:

Quoting Kaneporta1 (Reply 14):
I think the point customers are trying to make is, if something based on the A330 can be as good as the 787, why not go all new and make something much better than the 787?

Nice spin. I thought the A350 was 90% new and had gone beyond being a mere derivative of the A330? This begs the question what will make a competitive design much better than the 787?

[Edited 2006-04-29 14:49:30]

User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6783 times:

Quoting Kaneporta1 (Reply 14):
The A350 is not inferior to the 787. Like some airlines have said, the 2 airplanes are almost equal.

Kaneporta1, neither aeroplane actually exists at the moment. Their respective performance figures are a matter of estimates prepared by the two manufacturers' engineers and then discussed with the engineers of the various airlines.

So a lot of the figures are currently a matter of opinion, not fact. The thing that weighs very much in the favour of the 787, however, is that the design process is much further advanced. So a lot of what remains conjecture where the A350 is concerned is already fact for the 787.

[Edited 2006-04-29 14:45:52]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 52
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6666 times:

Quoting AirbusA6 (Reply 11):
You order a plane, then complain a year later that it's not good enough???

If the A350 is that inferior, why buy it in the first place???

Simple answer...    to exit Bankruptcy in an expeditious manner.

Regards,

Sal

[Edited 2006-04-29 15:52:08]


336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineAeroPiggot From United States of America, joined May 2005, 283 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5941 times:

I hate to sound like a conspiracy theorist here, but I am beginning to believe that there are people at Airbus who may be encouraging these guys (Hazy, SA, and US) to make public comments about the A350, so that they can generate more ammunition to persuade the Airbus/EADS board to go with an all new design. Because you don’t order a product and then bash it in public, that makes you look like a fool right??? So there must be more to this.... twocents 


A scientist discovers that which exists, an engineer creates that which never was.
User currently offlineKaneporta1 From Greece, joined May 2005, 739 posts, RR: 12
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5941 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 15):
Nice spin. I thought the A350 was 90% new and had gone beyond being a mere derivative of the A330?

The 350 is 90% new. Would you call the 717 a mere DC-9 derivative for the same reason?



I'd rather die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather, not terrified and screaming, like his passengers
User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 5861 times:

Quote:
Our newest product, the A350, is attracting a lot of attention in the industry, and not a little skepticism.

--Barry Eccleston, President of Airbus North America
http://www.leeham.net/filelib/AirbusSpeech041906.pdf


User currently offlineN44667 From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 4 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5815 times:

I'm kind of new here, and I just wanted to throw this out there: Boeing's 787 is pretty much completely different compared to most airplane designs. Unless you haven't been on Boeing's website in the past 2-3 years, (I'm pretty sure) it's 100% new. I'm not saying that Airbus should completely reinvent the wheel by going back to the drawing board on their plane, but why don't they go for something as radically designed as the 787?

Just my  twocents 



Aviation enduced nastalgia
User currently offlineSphealey From United States of America, joined May 2005, 377 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5784 times:

> Like some airlines have said, the 2
> airplanes are almost equal.

I think the real key here may be the question of fuel efficiency. Both the 787 and 350 were announced when oil was $40/bbl and expected to rise to $50/bbl over x years (say 5). Now oil is $70/bbl and experts are talking about $100/bbl by 2010 (please don't ask me how the same experts could predict $50/bbl in 2002 and $100/bbl in 2006; that is beyond my understanding!). With oil high and going higher I think fuel economy is starting to rule the decisions.

sPh


User currently offlineAvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2472 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5719 times:

Quoting Kaneporta1 (Reply 14):
The A350 is not inferior to the 787. Like some airlines have said, the 2 airplanes are almost equal. I think the point customers are trying to make is, if something based on the A330 can be as good as the 787, why not go all new and make something much better than the 787?

Not to flame you because you work on this airplane but recent customer feedback indicates the A350 isn't fully competitive with the in areas such as CASM (owing to the smaller cross-section) and fuel burn (it's still heavier than the 787). This indeed implies it is at least slightly inferior which is to be expected since it's not truly a clean-sheet design. In no way is it a bad design but the A330 derivative approach was taken to save costs and time. Airbus certainly CAN make a competitive airplane fully equal to or better than the 787 but to do that, they'd have to scrap the current design for an all-new one which would add years to the EIS date and billions more to the cost. No matter how many of its parts are "new", the A350 is still based on the A330, inheriting its basic fuselage and systems. This no doubt seemed a smart approach when conceived so as not to let too many years elapse before getting a 787 competitor to market but it stands to reason a derivative of a legacy design won't be entirely competitive to an all-new one, ironically, an argument Airbus made for a long time before the advent of the A350. A couple Boeing examples are the 767, ultimately made obsolete by the A330 and the 737, which, despite still-robust sales, is losing ground over time to the A320 due mainly to its heritage fuselage. Airbus undoubtedly weighed the pros and cons of clean-sheet vs. revamped derivative designs, albeit rather hastily out of pressure to respond quickly to the 787 threat. They must have concluded that the all-new approach, in addition to being much costlier (on the heels of the A380 overhead), would have taken too long to get to market to stem 787 sales before it was well entrenched into fleets. Radically revamping the A330 obviously made sense from a cost and time standpoint but it never made sense that it would fully equal an all-new approach, despite sales rhetoric to the contrary. Airbus is now hearing from customers what should have been obvious to them at the beginning, since they've used the same argument Boeing now makes so often before. Editorials in FI and AW&ST warned awhile back that pursuing this strategy would be risky for Airbus in such a key market but they were between a rock and a hard place due to time constraints. It's entirely possible they bet wrong on this and will pay for it by either fielding a less competitive design sooner or scrapping that for a far better and costlier one that will enter the market much later. If the current A350 can garner even 30% of sales, it won't be a waste but the question is whether or not it might not be better to scrap it in favor of an all-new model that would at least match if not better the 787 but would cede years of sales in this niche almost entirely to Boeing. A very difficult issue for Airbus to ponder in the next two months before their stated mid-year decision deadline. No doubt a lot of officials heads will be going grey over this one.


User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1718 posts, RR: 10
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 months 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 5719 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 6):
The other thing to remember is that Airbus and US's deal for the A350 explictly had terms in the contract to let US off the hook if the 350 is not competitive with the 787. If US actually utilizes that clause, there will be a deeply unhappy Airbus given the post-bankuptcy loans they provided US.

A friend of mine who works for HP has said this as well. If the A350 does not match the B787 within "a couple of percentage points", the contract maybe voided without penalty. He also implied that determination could be made on engineering assessments prior to actual flight test data. I wouldn't be surprised to learn other airlines have similar stipulations about the A350.



WhaleJets Rule!
25 Luisca : The problem with the A350 is that its performance disadvantages were to a certain point negligible 2 years ago when oil was cheaper. Also, 2 years ag
26 Ikramerica : I thought I had read on these forums (which means nothing, right?) that it wasn't that US could void the contract, but they could instead revert the
27 Atmx2000 : The 787 has a significant weight advantage. A 787-8.5 sized to have the same cabin length as the A358 should have a OEW that is about 12t less, despi
28 Post contains images Saturn5 : Who said so? Must be John Leahy. He also probably said that 787 is inferior to A350    [Edited 2006-04-29 20:52:21]
29 AA1818 : One would hope that these contingencies would be in place in today's competitive environment. If Airbus had not allowed such a clause it would seem a
30 Leelaw : No I wouldn't. However, you didn't answer my second question in response to your statement:
31 11Bravo : A bit OT, but there is also an issue of politeness and professionalism with regard to those comments. Qantas have nothing to gain from bad mouthing t
32 Ikramerica : Further, what if QF were to have said: "it was no contest." Then, Airbus knows QF was only playing them to get a better deal from B, and how does tha
33 AA1818 : I don't doubt that QF was cautious in choosing words for lots of reasons, but my point is that people use the term 'the same' or almost the same very
34 Post contains links NAV20 : In any case Qantas' remarks about there being nothing between the two competing firms referred only to the prices offered - NOT the comparative perfor
35 AA1818 : Thanks NAV20, just what I wanted. I hadn't realized that they had explicity said the 787 was better. Oh well, strngthens the 787's case as well, howev
36 Shenzhen : Maintaince costs Operating costs Technology.. such as heads up display Passenger Comfort The list goes on and on. Major vs Minor leagues. Cheers
37 Steeler83 : That brings up something that someone said on a different thread about the 787. That person said that it is merely a refurbished 767 and nothing more
38 NAV20 : Agree - it's obvious from the 'artist's impressions' that the 787 wing design is very different. It's probable that that is a spin-off from the Sonic
39 RIHNOSAUR : thanks Luisca, very concise it made a lot of sense, you have clarified quite well my inquiry. I agree the bird does look very modern, but many of the
40 Revelation : This is true, but not all that significant. Suppose Boeing started with the 767, kept the same fuselage and wing planform, and re-implemented it with
41 Post contains links and images NAV20 : Agree that the position isn't clear, Revelation - that's why I said 'could.'   But this paragraph from a Times article suggests that BAE (as opposed
42 JayinKitsap : Refering to the 787's looks, I believe that Boeing and the airlines opted for the most economical aerodynamics vs looks. Would you want the shark tail
43 AndesSMF : That is totally correct, but in the last few years Boeing has overdelivered on their promises, and Airbus hasnt. So if Boeing tells you this plane ca
44 Revelation : That's what I'd infer from the quoted article. At first I expected to find that it was some sort of dividend from being an Airbus stockholder, but gi
45 Steeler83 : I have seen the renderings of what the 748 will look like, and I think that they are trying to accomplish the same thing as well. The wing design and
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...
A350 Revamp: To Be Or Not To Be At Farnborough? posted Sun Jul 16 2006 12:32:57 by Leelaw
FI: Embattled Airbus A350 Rethink To Be "Dramatic" posted Mon May 8 2006 10:00:34 by Leelaw
Finnair Seems To Be Troubled With Its MD11s posted Fri Apr 21 2006 22:29:28 by LordHowe
Are VS' A343s Going To Be Refitted With V:PORT? posted Thu Feb 9 2006 12:14:18 by Concorde001
Embraer To Be 1st With Bleedless 150 Seater? posted Fri Jan 20 2006 23:08:38 by Okie
Israeli Aircraft To Be Equiped With Anti Missiles posted Thu Dec 1 2005 19:30:14 by 4xRuv
Big Part Of A350-wing To Be Built In Germany posted Sat Nov 12 2005 12:13:29 by Fraport
Sahara Airlines To Be Merged With Kingfisher/Jet? posted Sun Jul 10 2005 21:21:46 by Blrsea
Where UA Needs To Be Flying posted Fri Jan 16 2004 15:39:18 by UNITED777300
Awesome Pic. Needs To Be Seen. posted Sat Nov 17 2001 20:45:10 by TWA902fly