Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Airbus Already Offering New A350/A370?  
User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7462 times:

Has anyone heard, if Airbus is already marketing the new A350 behind the scenes? It would be typical Airbus to announce the plane in Farnborough with a raft of launch orders - SQ would be an obvious candidate.

40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3509 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 7437 times:

So far as anyone can tell, the new A350 will be delivered to any customer who has ordered the A350 so far and any customer that orders the A350 in the future. I have no idea where the A370 came from, but apparently there's a sizeable number of a.netters that think Airbus is willing to devote an entirely new type name to a product revision.


Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2829 posts, RR: 42
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7199 times:

Quoting Joni (Thread starter):
Has anyone heard, if Airbus is already marketing the new A350 behind the scenes? It would be typical Airbus to announce the plane in Farnborough with a raft of launch orders - SQ would be an obvious candidate.

Given the lack of details out on the plane, I doubt anyone save ILFC or EK have details on the plane right now. Rembember that the A350 was launched by a no competition bid from Air Europe (and for that matter the early Primaris orders for the 787 are also sketchy... ANA and JAL were the real launch a bit later).

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 1):
So far as anyone can tell, the new A350 will be delivered to any customer who has ordered the A350 so far and any customer that orders the A350 in the future. I have no idea where the A370 came from, but apparently there's a sizeable number of a.netters that think Airbus is willing to devote an entirely new type name to a product revision.

It's been widely reported in the trade magazines that the redesign would have a different sequence. However, because of the Bilaterial trade issues, and the WTO, I actually think they will stick with the name A350 so they don't hand Boeing yet another arrow for a fairly full quiver over the trade and government aid row.


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7178 times:

Apparently, they haven't been talking to Mr. Al-Baker of QR too much, as just yesterday he was fuming:

"They've changed the rules of the game,'' Al Baker said, referring to Airbus. "They now want to build a bigger airplane, with a larger capacity, a bigger cross section and they've not yet submitted to us or given us the proposal on what this airplane will do or when it will be delivered.''

"...We as an airline have a business plan. We need to grow. And when there are delays in deliveries, we have to then rethink our fleet strategy. If they don't have their game in order, then it is their problem."


see: Qatar Airways May Drop A350 For B787 (by PanAm_DC10 Jun 5 2006 in Civil Aviation)

[Edited 2006-06-06 16:07:59]

User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3598 posts, RR: 66
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7151 times:

Quoting Joni (Thread starter):
Has anyone heard, if Airbus is already marketing the new A350 behind the scenes?

If they aren't talking to some of their large potential customers (EK,SQ etc), then their strategic planning isn't based in reality.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2829 posts, RR: 42
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7139 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 3):
"They've changed the rules of the game,'' Al Baker said, referring to Airbus. "They now want to build a bigger airplane, with a larger capacity, a bigger cross section and they've not yet submitted to us or given us the proposal on what this airplane will do or when it will be delivered.''

Al-Baker seems to be sick and tired of playing second fiddle to EK in the region.


User currently offlineMham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3726 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 7101 times:

Its a little amusing how quick people believe planes and specs are drawn up. It doesn't happen overnight, in fact a good comprehensive strategy takes many months to come up with. If Airbus is already marketing yet another new plane with promises of granduer, my prediction is that it is as doomed as the old/new 350.

User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 7042 times:

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 4):
f they aren't talking to some of their large potential customers (EK,SQ etc), then their strategic planning isn't based in reality.

Yet their best customer for the "old all-new A350," QR with up to 60 "FIRM ORDER COMMITMENTS," has been crying like a "stuck pig" for the last 2-3 weeks to anyone in the media who will listen that they've been "out of the loop" regarding information about the nascent "newest all-new A350 (A370)." Strange times indeed.


User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1725 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6986 times:

Quoting Joni (Thread starter):
It would be typical Airbus to announce the plane in Farnborough with a raft of launch orders - SQ would be an obvious candidate.

I don't see how that's possible. Airbus has to design the aircraft, figure out all the production and supplier issues, then go to the existing customers and see if they are still on board.

To get firm launch orders, Airbus will have to have refined engineering and performance data, and they have to know production slot availability. If it were possible to get that all figured out in just a few months, we wouldn't see the product development cycle times that we do.

Also, given the troubled and ever-changing history of the A350 program so far, I suspect most prospective customers are going to be very cautious about this latest iteration. I think most of them will absolutely insist on very precise, specific, and extremely detailed information before they even consider buying this aircraft.

I'll bet you're looking at mid 2007 before you see any firm orders.



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6934 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 2):
I actually think they will stick with the name A350 so they don't hand Boeing yet another arrow for a fairly full quiver over the trade and government aid row.

I respectfully disagree with you concerning the fullness of Boeing's "free trade quiver", in particular with respect to the B787 and A350.

Quoting Mham001 (Reply 6):
Its a little amusing how quick people believe planes and specs are drawn up. It doesn't happen overnight, in fact a good comprehensive strategy takes many months to come up with. If Airbus is already marketing yet another new plane with promises of granduer, my prediction is that it is as doomed as the old/new 350.

I suppose (versus "know") that the design Airbus is now going to be marketing is one that's been developed for a long time by now, but it's been the "more investment/higher efficiency" design and not the one they've been planning to produce. They must have studied making a wider, all Al-Li fuselage in detail before deciding to stick with the previous fuselage diameter. In other words, they didn't start from scratch one month ago.


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6928 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 1):
So far as anyone can tell, the new A350 will be delivered to any customer who has ordered the A350 so far and any customer that orders the A350 in the future

Source please.

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 4):
If they aren't talking to some of their large potential customers (EK,SQ etc), then their strategic planning isn't based in reality

This is exactly what all the fuss is about. Then they blame the customers for "Late input".

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 7):
Yet their best customer for the "old all-new A350," QR with up to 60 "FIRM ORDER COMMITMENTS," has been crying like a "stuck pig" for the last 2-3 weeks to anyone in the media who will listen that they've been "out of the loop" regarding information about the nascent "newest all-new A350 (A370)." Strange times indeed.

Gotta laugh at the whole fiasco. Bet the champaign is flowing in Chicago and Seattle.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6889 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 10):

Boeing have less to celebrate now than they did a year ago. If this aircraft does get launched, then the 787 is not the only model that will be vunerable.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 10):
Source please.

Well what he is saying does make sense in a way. With 787 slots gone until mid 2011, there is no other alternative for airlines whom have ordered A350s. Either they wait until the new one is ready (early 2012) or buy A330, A340s (as some have) or 767s/777s.


User currently offlineAirMailer From United States of America, joined May 2006, 481 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6839 times:

Quoting Joni (Reply 9):
They must have studied making a wider, all Al-Li fuselage in detail before deciding to stick with the previous fuselage diameter. In other words, they didn't start from scratch one month ago.

I would concur that they would have at least had this set of plans on the shelf, they probably just dusted them off and started plugging in plastic where ever they could.


User currently offlineGrantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6827 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
Boeing have less to celebrate now than they did a year ago. If this aircraft does get launched, then the 787 is not the only model that will be vunerable

I disagree here. If Airbus really commits to an aircraft that competes for the upper part of the 787 market and the 777, it leaves a gap in the lower part of the market for Boeing to exploit (where the A300/A310/A330 are). At the time the Airbus aircraft comes to market, the upper part should be well saturated and the lower part should be open. Once the US majors recover (hopefully) and they and others start looking for 752/762/A300 replacements, Boeing will have the answer, Airbus won't.

And on top of that, it ties Airbus up with a more ambitious program to follow on the A380, leaving Boeing to lead ahead with the 737RS program, which could result in a redo of the A350 fiasco.


User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6797 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
Well what he is saying does make sense in a way. With 787 slots gone until mid 2011, there is no other alternative for airlines whom have ordered A350s. Either they wait until the new one is ready (early 2012) or buy A330, A340s (as some have) or 767s/777s

I was just looking for his source to read it for myself.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2829 posts, RR: 42
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6797 times:

Quoting Joni (Reply 9):
I respectfully disagree with you concerning the fullness of Boeing's "free trade quiver", in particular with respect to the B787 and A350.

Of course you do  Wink

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 13):

I disagree here. If Airbus really commits to an aircraft that competes for the upper part of the 787 market and the 777, it leaves a gap in the lower part of the market for Boeing to exploit (where the A300/A310/A330 are). At the time the Airbus aircraft comes to market, the upper part should be well saturated and the lower part should be open. Once the US majors recover (hopefully) and they and others start looking for 752/762/A300 replacements, Boeing will have the answer, Airbus won't.

Which is a important point. Unless Airbus can convience the US carriers that they need to upsize their entire fleet (which the overwhelming trends has been smaller - no 744, no 757 in favor of the narrowbodies A318/319/737/8/9s) they will be out of luck on this one.

Quoting Joni (Reply 9):
I suppose (versus "know") that the design Airbus is now going to be marketing is one that's been developed for a long time by now, but it's been the "more investment/higher efficiency" design and not the one they've been planning to produce. They must have studied making a wider, all Al-Li fuselage in detail before deciding to stick with the previous fuselage diameter. In other words, they didn't start from scratch one month ago.

Look at how well that served Boeing with the 745/6 and the 747X.

ILFC and EK know what they were doing. They spoke up because they beleived Airbus was going to commit to the wrong model. It appears to have (rightly - IMHO) created a bit of a panic.

In addition there is also the logistics problems - composites are in short demand, titanium is expensive, and Airbus has pesky political problems even deciding where to build the plane.


User currently offlineZeus419 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2004, 136 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6797 times:

IMHO -- It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that there could be two or even three distinct designations -- i.e. A350 for the 250-300 seat market, and an A360 and/or A370 for the larger segment(s) -- going up to 400+ seats.

I think that offering a family along the same lines as A330/A340, using common technology/systems would be worth considering (but with wing-area, fuselage length, and engine thrust optimised for the missions).

. . . and maybe this could even mean a new 440 seat aircraft powered by four GEnx (or four Trent 1000s) at the very top end to take on the B747-800, and fill the gap in the Airbus product line, at around the same time that the 650-seat A380-900 stretch is offered.

[Edited 2006-06-06 17:45:46]

User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1725 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6791 times:

Quoting Joni (Reply 9):
I suppose (versus "know") that the design Airbus is now going to be marketing is one that's been developed for a long time by now, but it's been the "more investment/higher efficiency" design and not the one they've been planning to produce. They must have studied making a wider, all Al-Li fuselage in detail before deciding to stick with the previous fuselage diameter. In other words, they didn't start from scratch one month ago.

I think you're really grasping at straws there Joni. There is no evidence whatsoever to suggest Airbus has had parallel design plans all along. I think that's just pure fantasy on your part.

If that was the case, why didn't they present those proposals to AC, NW, QF, and all the rest when it was perfectly obvious that the A350 was coming up short time after time? What you're saying here is that Airbus has lost tens of billions in orders that they might have won if they'd presented the "other plans". It makes no sense at all.



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6791 times:

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 13):
US majors recover (hopefully) and they and others start looking for 752/762/A300 replacements, Boeing will have the answer, Airbus won't.

The only US major that airbus would have a chance with would be United. NW have gone for the 787, US for the A350. CO, DL and AA are boeing-only airlines. Its quite possible that neither of these airlines will ever order from airbus again. CO and if im not mistaken DL have idealogical exclusivity agreements with Boeing, only legalities have prented this from going on paper in the past.


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6791 times:

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 8):
Also, given the troubled and ever-changing history of the A350 program so far, I suspect most prospective customers are going to be very cautious about this latest iteration. I think most of them will absolutely insist on very precise, specific, and extremely detailed information before they even consider buying this aircraft.

I'll bet you're looking at mid 2007 before you see any firm orders.

After all, Tim Clark of EK urged Airbus in May:

...not to be rushed into freezing the specifications on the A350 in a bid to cut the 787’s head start.

“The airline community has made it clear to Airbus that the 787 is the better aircraft and therefore it should not be down to us to tell them the risks of continuing with an airliner that is not the best. With fuel prices as they are, we need these guys to push their research and development as far as possible. If they do that, you will find people will wait.”


http://81.144.183.107/Articles/2006/...+integrate+A350+technology+on.html


User currently offlineOldAeroGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3598 posts, RR: 66
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6721 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 7):
Yet their best customer for the "old all-new A350," QR with up to 60 "FIRM ORDER COMMITMENTS," has been crying like a "stuck pig" for the last 2-3 weeks to anyone in the media who will listen that they've been "out of the loop" regarding information about the nascent "newest all-new A350 (A370)."

Maybe Airbus doesn't consider QR quite as important as EK and SQ.



Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31420 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6712 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Airbus is no doubt polling their current operators (A330/A340) and potential operators (A350) on what they want to see in the plane.

Since only a few of each have said they wanted a bigger plane (and QR wasn't one of them), Airbus may indeed be trying to find a more middle-ground solution then the 777-sized "A370" we keep tossing about here.

If RR (and/or GE) have stated they can supply higher-thrust engines in the Trent 1700 (and GEnx) families, Airbus might be trying to keep the A350 design as is and just stretch it out to A340-600 levels to get the capacity (at 8 abreast) some of their customers are demanding. This would allow them to cover the A330 and A342/A343 markets while leaving the A345/A346 to soldier on against the 772LR/773ER. Yes, they're losing that war overall, but they're still winning sales battles and that might be enough until they either ressurrect the A340E program or eventually build a large twin to fight the 773/Y3/748.

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 13):
If Airbus really commits to an aircraft that competes for the upper part of the 787 market and the 777, it leaves a gap in the lower part of the market for Boeing to exploit (where the A300/A310/A330 are).

In addition to having an advantage at the lower end of the widebody market with the 787 should Airbus indeed launch a 777-sized model as the new one, it also allows Boeing to scale Y1 up to the lower end of the 787-8, minimizing the capacity gap. Airbus, on the other hand, would have a large gap between the largest A320RS and smallest "A370", just as they do now between the largest A340 and smallest A380.


User currently onlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12966 posts, RR: 25
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 6677 times:

Quoting Joni (Reply 9):
They must have studied making a wider, all Al-Li fuselage in detail before deciding to stick with the previous fuselage diameter. In other words, they didn't start from scratch one month ago.

As you stated, that is your supposition. My supposition would be that the higher-ups said we don't want to spend a lot of money on this project, so you must re-use the A330/A340 tooling and production line. As an engineer, I feel it'd be highly unlikely that they would do two detailed studies. I think at best they'd have done a conceptual study of the alternatives, and as I said above, that study would have been squashed by the higher-ups controlling the budget.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6625 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 2):
ANA and JAL were the real launch a bit later

ANA was the launch customer in April 2004 (firmed July 2004), not Primaris.

NZ quickly followed with 2 (firmed August 2004). Then First Choice and Blue Panorama, who both firmed their orders so they aren't vapor.

Not sure where you got your timeline, but Primaris (5th, october 2004) and JAL (6th, december 2004) both came later, with of course Primaris never to be firmed and JAL firmed in 2005.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offline787engineer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 15
Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 2 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 6481 times:

Quoting Joni (Reply 9):
I suppose (versus "know") that the design Airbus is now going to be marketing is one that's been developed for a long time by now, but it's been the "more investment/higher efficiency" design and not the one they've been planning to produce. They must have studied making a wider, all Al-Li fuselage in detail before deciding to stick with the previous fuselage diameter. In other words, they didn't start from scratch one month ago.

Both Airbus and Boeing are constantly doing studies on the 'next version' of each plane in their current product line, and also studying new niches or markets. I'm sure they studied making a wider fuselage, but rough dimensions and surfaces are easy to create. AFAIK new wings, empennage, etc were made during the 7E7 days every other week, and the internal parts were 'morphed' to fit the new lofts. But the hard (and time consuming) part comes from engineering the structure and going through all the load cycles to make sure the structure will hold up. No airplane starts from scratch, each manufacturer has entire libraries full of previous studies. For all intents and purposes the new wider A350 would be starting from the beginning.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 10):
Gotta laugh at the whole fiasco. Bet the champaign is flowing in Chicago and Seattle.

Until the 787 rolls out and meets its requirements, no champagne will be flowing  Wink.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):

Boeing have less to celebrate now than they did a year ago. If this aircraft does get launched, then the 787 is not the only model that will be vunerable.

I'd be very interested to see what Airbus can come up with that will be competitive from the 788 to the 773. IMO, it simply isn't possible.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):

Well what he is saying does make sense in a way. With 787 slots gone until mid 2011, there is no other alternative for airlines whom have ordered A350s. Either they wait until the new one is ready (early 2012) or buy A330, A340s (as some have) or 767s/777s.

Unless of course Boeing opens up a second production line for the 787. . . something the higher ups have been working on for quite some time now.

Quoting Zeus419 (Reply 16):
IMHO -- It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that there could be two or even three distinct designations -- i.e. A350 for the 250-300 seat market, and an A360 and/or A370 for the larger segment(s) -- going up to 400+ seats.

I think that offering a family along the same lines as A330/A340, using common technology/systems would be worth considering (but with wing-area, fuselage length, and engine thrust optimised for the missions).

. . . and maybe this could even mean a new 440 seat aircraft powered by four GEnx (or four Trent 1000s) at the very top end to take on the B747-800, and fill the gap in the Airbus product line, at around the same time that the 650-seat A380-900 stretch is offered.

Now would these three distinct designations have different fuselage shapes/diameter? If they will be the same how much more efficient will this A350/A360/A370 family be than the A330/A340 especially when competeing against a range of aircraft from the A300/783 to the A340/772 and 773? Wouldn't this family be much like the A330/A340 except with a twin A340? There's no way you can get have a plane seat 440 in 8 abreast or even 9Y. You'd have to go 10Y or have a sizable upper deck.


25 Shenzhen : The further the A350 gets pushed to the right, the riskier it becomes in the eyes of the Airlines that will be purchasing. If the Airplane arrives 4+
26 Post contains links and images NAV20 : This Jim Wallace article has a lot of quotes from last week's IATA conference in Paris. The article strongly suggests that Airbus hasn't yet decided e
27 Grantcv : When I was a kid, I remember asking my dad why there was no B717. He replied that the C135 was actually the B717. If Airbus decides to scrap the A350
28 Joni : To the contrary, they've said that they welcome customer input, and have relied on it heavily ever since they made the A320 and A330/A340. Are you su
29 Post contains links Leelaw : On the sidelines of the IATA conference this week, Tim Clark, president of Emirates, the largest Arab airline, said he wanted to shout "hallelujah" wh
30 Joni : Leelaw, do you copy-paste your own posts to several threads?
31 Leelaw : Rarely, I thought it was appropriate this time as it was relevant to both threads in which I posted it as they are essentially discussing the same to
32 Post contains images Manni : Why's there no 747-500 or 600? What happened to the 777-100? Why's the 767 smaller than the 747, while the 777 is bigger than the 767? This is gettin
33 11Bravo : Good, then we're in agreement. Airbus has a conceptual design for an aircraft with a larger fuselage, a new wing, new engines, etc. Now all they have
34 Grantcv : All I was pointing out that the best way to help people forget about the A350 fiasco would be to retain the A350 designation for the next iteration r
35 Stitch : Until they apply it to a new plane, as Boeing did with the 717. Of course, folks will probably point out that plane was a "failure" too, since it sol
36 Ken777 : I have a feeling that Airbus has been working on the 370 for a fairly long time, with their long term planning being to deliver it as a 777 competitor
37 787engineer : No, I'm not contradicting myself, I'm pointing out that your claim that Airbus isn't starting from scratch since studies have been done on wider fuse
38 Post contains images Astuteman : Mee too If you include the 4-aisle A380 at the top, it sounds suspiciously like a fairly robust product strategy, doesn't it? Regards
39 Grantcv : If Airbus are doing an A370, then I imagine it will start out as a 772 competitor and grow to be a 773ER competitor. Given that Airbus has about a si
40 Stitch : But if so, why was Airbus responding to the success of the 777 with incremental improvements to the A340 (the A340E) and an EIS of 2011? I would thin
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...
Airbus A350/A370, What Will It Look Like? posted Thu Jun 22 2006 16:55:50 by WINGS
Imminent: Airbus Reveals New A350 posted Wed Jun 7 2006 07:22:28 by Singapore_Air
Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350 posted Mon May 15 2006 00:25:02 by NYC777
Composite Divide: Airbus, Boeing And The New A350 posted Fri May 12 2006 12:06:17 by A380900
Will The New A350 Mean The A340 Is Dead? posted Mon May 8 2006 20:53:16 by BoeingBus
Airbus All-New A350 May Work To Boeings Advantage? posted Mon Jun 13 2005 01:37:18 by BoeingBus
When Is Airbus Going To Update Their Website? posted Sun Nov 12 2006 05:40:44 by Dougloid
Is Airbus The Next Enron? posted Fri Oct 13 2006 05:57:44 by Tangowhisky
How Far Behind Is Airbus? posted Sat Oct 7 2006 22:45:08 by Glom
1st HP 757 Is Getting Painted In New Colors! posted Sat Sep 23 2006 20:23:09 by Phxplanes