Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 22314 times:
Guy Norris is reporting in the electronic edition of this week's Flight International (05/09/06) that Airbus is working on a "dramatic redesign" of the A350 aimed at an all new aircraft family capable of leapfrogging the rival 787 as well as the 777.
The new family is expected to comprise three versions A350-800 (aimed at the 787-3/8/9), -900 (aimed at the 787-10 & 772ER), -1000 (aimed at the 773ER) and will include: a larger, all composite wing; an approximately 555mm (19in) wider fuselage; more powerful 85,000-90,000 thrust-class engines; and the same Al-Li structure as the "original" A350.
"Flight International has learned that Airbus internal planning douments claim new techonology engines and lighter structural weight will enable [the A350-1000] to achieve up to a 20% lower fuel burn than 773ER...it is understood that the common cross section is likely to be adopted over an alternative study that favoured retaining the original diameter for the smaller -800/900, and increasing it for the -1000."
The -900 would enter service first in 2012, followed by -800, and the -1000 coming last in either late 2013 or early 2014.
LTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 14067 posts, RR: 47
Reply 5, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 22230 times:
Quoting Leelaw (Reply 2): "The move to the larger twin concept also means the formal abandonement of Airbus's fundamental belief in its long-range four-engine policy."
Nonetheless, Airbus still has time to work on the A350-1000/A370, since if it exists, it's only in the R&D stage. Airbus will have to go through with the A350-8/9 being a twin, while they can still decide on whether to make the -1000/A370 a twin or a quad. Until Airbus makes a formal announcement on this new aircraft, all options may still be open.
AndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 22154 times:
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 6):
If they can get the weight improvements while still using Al-Li, why would using that material be 'wrong'? Composites are not the One True Way, however much a.netters would have you believe.
Thats true, but the weight advantage is not the only reason to use composite. From the maintenance purpose, the lack of corrosion can help a lot. Plus, more airplanes are being built out of composites than concrete, so right now, the only options you have to build an airplane are metals or composites. Airbus chose metals, Boeing chose composites. The future is certainly interesting.
So which is it? 19in (483mm) or 555mm (21.9in) The latter is the difference in width between the A300 and 777 cross section so unless Airbus is copying the 777, it must be the former.
Is Airbus sticking to their strategy of designing the frame for X abreast, and not in between X abreast an X+1 abreast? Or are they relying on thinner cabin walls to make up the difference and allow this design to seat 10 abreast? Either way, Airbus fans will have to find some other reason to justify their preference for Airbus widebody jets other than 2+4+2 seating.
Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 6): The problem currently is the weight, not the material. They could use concrete for all the airlines would care, if they could get the weight down to acceptable levels.
But the material and the way it is used to make the plane determines the weight. Unless there is something preventing Airbus from making a structurally efficient A350, the increased weight of the A350 versus the 787 likely has something to do with material.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
RichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 22052 times:
Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 10): But the material and the way it is used to make the plane determines the weight. Unless there is something preventing Airbus from making a structurally efficient A350, the increased weight of the A350 versus the 787 likely has something to do with material.
And thats my point - if they can solve the weight problems with a particular material then why does the material used matter?
Killjoy From Finland, joined Dec 1999, 646 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 21999 times:
Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 10): Unless there is something preventing Airbus from making a structurally efficient A350, the increased weight of the A350 versus the 787 likely has something to do with material.
This redesign could actually change a lot, since they won't need to take the old assembly line into consideration.
Atmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 36
Reply 17, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 21844 times:
Quoting MD-90 (Reply 16):
Airbus probably simply can't produce a composite A350 quickly enough to counter the 787. Thus, even with a major redesign, they're sticking with Al-Li.
Cessna, Beech, and Mooney still sell lots of airplanes, even with Cirrus, Columbia, and Diamond out there
I personally think they are better off waiting two years at this point to see what 787 is like. But I guess they are afraid that they will lose too many potential sales if they don't do something now. And Boeing will be able to set the price for the 787, and generate significant cash flow in the future to fund new products down the road.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 21844 times:
I think the bigger lines of Airbus strategy are becoming clearer every day.
While on this forum Airbus have been bashed heavily for their inability to come up with something radical and their apparent arrogance in sticking to the proposed A350 with its standard 8-abreast seating, they have apparently been working extremely hart on something even more dramatic than what most of us had been hoping/calling/warning (*) for: not only a good 787 competitor, but also a real 777 killer.
(*): fill in as you please depending on your preference.
The comments from ILFC, SQ and ER -and more so their weird reluctance to simultaneously commit to any 787 despite them calling the A350 only second best- can be fully understood too now: they must have seen the detailed proposals, were more than charmed by them yet feared Airbus was going to shelf them for whatever reason you can think of and decided to speak out and thus try to force Airbus to go ahead with what they have seen.
The Boeing cheerleaders happily saw all these comments as pure A350 bashing, but in fact they might very well have been stimulating the A350, although a different A350 than the public at large still had in mind at that time. I personally think that if the A350 is relaunched under this latest form (most probably at Farnborough, given the pace of new reports and the deadline put forward by ILFC's CEO) we will see some of them step on board right away.
I think this wider A350 in 3 versions is not such good news for the 787, as it will now face a much more closely fought battle with a wider and thus more versatile competitor (although it should be able to withstand the attack) but it certainly is terrible news for the 777 line which will be flying on borrowed time as from then on: Emirates for instance has been pushing Airbus to do something to their A340 not to loose the outstanding orders and this A350-1000 might be the much wanted upgrade. One can only start to imagine the consequences for the 777 backlog if indeed the A350-1000 is launched.
It is good news for us aviation enthusiasts however, as it will give us more than one thing too look forward to over the coming years.
Johnny From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 hour ago) and read 21740 times:
If this airplane family come true, it will be a huge step forward for airbus.
It the -1000 is launched very soon, i do not expect further orders for both the A340 AND the B777 as they are BOTH dead with the -1000x and the B787-10 in line...
The 1000X with its wider fuselage could be a big hurt for Boeing for coming B748-sales as well.With the same fuselage length as the A346 it could accom. around 400 pax - the ideal replacement for the B744 is born.
That in combination with a 20percent lower (assumed) fuelburn in comp. to the B777-300ER.
Amazing !!! WOOW!!!
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 19
Reply 23, posted (9 years 3 months 4 weeks ago) and read 21508 times:
This isn't good news:
Quote: While dramatically enhancing the productï¿½s overall competitiveness against both the 777 and 787 families, it will also inevitably delay the development schedule. Under the original A350 plan, Airbus expected to put the first aircraft into service in late 2010. Under the revised schedule, first delivery is expected to be no earlier than 2012.
The new plan would call for the introduction of the -900 first, with the -800 following and the -1000 coming last in late 2013 or early 2014.
This new aircraft better leapfrog, not equal, the 787. If you ask customers to wait until at least 6 years from now, they are almost betting their companies (and certainly their jobs) that the wait will be worth it. It's a "leap of faith" by Airbus and their customers. What about the existing customers? If Airbus were to lose one, or two, to Boeing, it would be a PR disaster.
EDIT: Still no A300/310 size replacement here.
What about the A320 replacement? Lots and lots to do in the next 6-8 years!
[Edited 2006-05-08 12:43:36]
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".