Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Should Boeing Fear Airbus' "Double Daggers"  
User currently offlineReggaebird From Jamaica, joined Nov 1999, 1176 posts, RR: 0
Posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8270 times:

Airbus' big reveal of its plans to combat Boeing's mid-size products should have come as no surprise. Airbus was, arguably, successful in using its double daggers of cabin width and range increases to destroy the 767's future. Therefore, it makes sense that they would sharpen up the old weapons and try to use them again (A350XWB will be wider than 787 and fly farther than 777). However, any good warrior learns from his/her previous battle losses. Will Boeing be able to counter these weapons this time or should they be shuddering in their boots??! I bet that old Boeing has a "new weapon" up its sleeve this time. Only time will tell.

Reggaebird

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFleet Service From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 623 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8194 times:

Yes, that paper airplane certainly is a world beater isn't it?  Yeah sure

I remember lofty promises made about another Airbus product not too long ago, and we see airlines demanding compensation for promises made and not kept...



Yes, I actually *do* work for an airline,how about you?
User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1597 posts, RR: 17
Reply 2, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 8178 times:

Boeing is not looking at the 772ER as the 787-10 will fit that replacement.

As for the 772LR and 77ER is where Boeing will have some work to do... But even though the 773ER has had some success its still a niche market in comparison to the smaller 787.

It's already known that Boeing is thinking of cutting some weight on the 772LR for Qantas... so the gap is smaller, if that happens.

I wouldn't be surprised if Boeing competes by offering a more efficient 773ER in 2-3 years time, to compete with the A359-1000. Boeing can make the case for its customers to not jump to the A359-1000 in 2015 with a more efficient jet 4-5 years earlier.

--> Lets step back and also talk about how Airbus single handidly hijacked its own market today. Killed the A340 line... Did Airbus get its return on investment for this line? So they are planning to spend 10 billion to for an efficient A359-1000, which at the same time lose A380 sales. Most likely the CASM will be lower going with the smaller new generation planes than the A380.

--> But we still dont know to much about the A350... I dont think Airbus knows what it needs to do... look at their website... almost no info available..

So these posts are bit premature as no one knows what the impact will be. Boeing may need an all new design but it may not...



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineDrerx7 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 5209 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8045 times:

Well--I don't think Boeing has much to worry about for 'this round' as the A350 will trail the 787 to market by nearly 4 years. Due to Airbus tardiness I think we'll see a game of one-up-manship for the next 20 years. I'll reserve my judgement until the A350 design is frozen--it certainly looks promising on paper but I think that ultimately it may be a 777 replacement for airlines versus a 787 competitor due to its size and availability date.


Third Coast born, means I'm Texas raised
User currently offlineSprout5199 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1855 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7904 times:

I think the widebody market is overrated. Why bet the house on selling a few planes with a big margin vs a lot of planes with a smaller margin? I know Boeing did this once(747) but look what happened to Lockheed and MD. I think the real winner in the "plane race" will be the one who gets the B737/A320 replacement right. But at the same time the "loser" will get about 40-45 % of the market, so nobody loses(look at coke and pepsi). Neither company will die.

And if China tries to "enter" the market Look for this---A Boeing/Airbus aircraft. The "old" world and the "new" world will get together to beat the "third" world. (No offence meant to anyone, don't know how to say it any other way). Like it or not we(the US and EU) are closer than either of us and China.

Just my  twocents 

Dan in Jupiter


User currently offlineF14ATomcat From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7853 times:

Who has the daggers? Airbus? Are you kidding. The 787 and 777 have killed the A330 / A340. The A350 XWB is not competing against the 787 head-on and Y3 will limit its' upside. Unless, of course you mean the A380 and A350 revision of a revison of a revison is cutting Airbus' throat. And what if Boeing puts a composite wing on the 777? I doubt they will waste their time. And what if they build a wing out of styrofoam or superlow density radiated zirconium or maybe, just maybe fairy feathers?

User currently offlineGlacote From France, joined Jun 2005, 409 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 22 hours ago) and read 7621 times:

Quoting Fleet Service (Reply 1):
I remember lofty promises made about another Airbus product not too long ago, and we see airlines demanding compensation for promises made and not kept...

That is just false.

Airlines seeked compensation for the aircraft being late. Not for its not meeting advertised performance (and with the amount of flight testing they should know). Note that none cancelled their order despite their hyped ability to do so after the delay. The largest one plublicly stated they did not even consider it.

Please stay straight on facts. Airbus is late on the A388. It is not underdelivering (at least yet).


User currently offlineCloudy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 7583 times:

Quoting Sprout5199 (Reply 4):
I think the widebody market is overrated. Why bet the house on selling a few planes with a big margin vs a lot of planes with a smaller margin? I know Boeing did this once(747) but look what happened to Lockheed and MD. I think the real winner in the "plane race" will be the one who gets the B737/A320 replacement right. But at the same time the "loser" will get about 40-45 % of the market, so nobody loses(look at coke and pepsi). Neither company will die.

There are several reason both A & B are focusing on widebodies(for now).

1. Higher margins.

2. The ability to avoid direct competition, for a while. Notice how the new version of the A350 is aimed as much at the 777 as the 7E7. The 7E7-8 was aimed at Airbus's weakest point. The 767 was never a match for the A330, or the A340 for the 777. Airbus and Boeing could claim higher margins on the A330 and the 777. The size range of any new narrowbody family is pretty much fixed in the 100-200 seat range. It is much harder to get a "semi-monopoly" by having the best or only aircraft of a given size.

3. Composite technology, A-Li, etc. don't provide the same dividends for narrow-bodies. There are still major advantages, but widebodies provide a much bigger payoff.

Both A&B have said they have to wait for major engine advances to make all-new narrow-bodies worthwhile. Another possibility is a serious 3rd party competitor - that would really throw a wrench into both planemakers' plans....


User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2259 posts, RR: 56
Reply 8, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 7534 times:

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 2):
Airbus single handidly hijacked its own market today. Killed the A340 line...

Killed the A340, maybe... but as you probably know, the production line is literally shared with the A330 so the line will be fine for several years yet... all the more so with the probable launch of a new model (A330F) this week.

Anyway, as is pointed out on a.net a dozen times a day, hadn't the 777 done it in already? The A350 is merely the coup de grace.

Quoting Glacote (Reply 6):

Airlines seeked compensation for the aircraft being late.

Isn't that a form of "promise made and not kept"? Fleet Service did not distinguish between schedule and performance misses in his crude A vs. B zinger.

Anyway, we all know anybody can design a good paper airplane, and the difficult part is producing it... program execution is where things went sour for the A380, and we have yet to see what this holds for the 787. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.


User currently offlineNudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 19
Reply 9, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 21 hours ago) and read 7513 times:

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 8):
Isn't that a form of "promise made and not kept"? Fleet Service did not distinguish between schedule and performance misses in his crude A vs. B zinger.

Nonsense, they do. Because if the 380 and the missions it's made for is exactly what they need, they differ between delivery on time and the mission key numbers.

People seem to forget that airlines are not like the typical customer of some region... If it's late I'm gonna cancel... It's not a home theater. ? Not a new iPod, an airplane is a long term investment that will live and perform much longer than your iPod or your fancy flat screen. The buyers are wise companies (mostly), not stupid consumers. If EK, LH, or whoever thinks that the 380 will be a great fit, it will be. If it's late, they sure ask for a compensation, but the important numbers, casm, oerformance, economics, they'll be met. There is a reason why some of the 380 customers are amongst the most successful airlines. It;s not the 3890 that is bringing the crown in, it's wise management and well-thought decision-making.



Putana da Seatbeltz!
User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1186 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 7378 times:

I'm concerned that Boeing might experience problems with the B787 beyond their wildest imagination.
If the subcontractors fail to deliver, if the "plastic" fail to certify, or if the "plastic" again reveals serious unknown weakness' in such large pieces and parts, Boeing could see a disaster beyond anything they experienced in the late 90's with their proposed 14 aircrafts a month production line.
Some Boeing engineers, I read, already call it it 7late7.

I hope and believe that Boeing is working constantly on these issues because with such an order book that the B787 will have at EIS (my guess 600++ firm orders) this gamble will make the B747 project in the 60's and 70's look like a walk in the park.

I see Boeing as one of the most pioneer companies the world has ever seen ... ever. Just amazing. But Boeing have done it before! I believe it can do it again.


User currently offlineNudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 19
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 19 hours ago) and read 7368 times:

Quoting Chiad (Reply 10):
'm concerned that Boeing might experience problems with the B787 beyond their wildest imagination.
If the subcontractors fail to deliver, if the "plastic" fail to certify, or if the "plastic" again reveals serious unknown weakness' in such large pieces and parts, Boeing could see a disaster beyond anything they experienced in the late 90's with their proposed 14 aircrafts a month production line.
Some Boeing engineers, I read, already call it it 7late7.

I hope and believe that Boeing is working constantly on these issues because with such an order book that the B787 will have at EIS (my guess 600++ firm orders) this gamble will make the B747 project in the 60's and 70's look like a walk in the park.

I see Boeing as one of the most pioneer companies the world has ever seen ... ever. Just amazing. But Boeing have done it before! I believe it can do it again.

That's a quite negative view, but honestly, this is possible. And here is why, and I mean this as a compliment: Boeing is pushing the envelope in materials and manufacturing. If they succeed they can really be proud of something. If they are late, they still set a milestone. The challenges are huge.

And before anybody starts bashing me, I love both sides, and I very much love the 787 and I am very much fascinated by the new ideas of the 787, but nothing is safe yet, there is a long way to go.



Putana da Seatbeltz!
User currently offlineOldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 7321 times:

Quoting Chiad (Reply 10):
I'm concerned that Boeing might experience problems with the B787 beyond their wildest imagination.
If the subcontractors fail to deliver, if the "plastic" fail to certify, or if the "plastic" again reveals serious unknown weakness' in such large pieces and parts, Boeing could see a disaster beyond anything they experienced in the late 90's with their proposed 14 aircrafts a month production line.
Some Boeing engineers, I read, already call it it 7late7.

This is ecactly what I think about this program. Boeing will face serious problems in the near future and let us see how they can solve it.

So:

Quoting Drerx7 (Reply 3):
Well--I don't think Boeing has much to worry about for 'this round' as the A350 will trail the 787 to market by nearly 4 years.

Not if the 787 comes 1 or 2 years later than pronounced.

Axel



Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1186 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 7243 times:

Quoting Nudelhirsch (Reply 11):
That's a quite negative view, but honestly, this is possible.

Mmmm. Yeah ... I guess you are right. I am sorry. I dont mean to be negative.
However I honestly think Boeing will make it. But I also think we will see something similar as with the A380 or worse because even though the A380 is a "bigger" project in certain ways, the B787 is ..... more insecure.
I cant quite find the words here, but with such an impressive estimated order book as of the B787 at EIS, as not to mention the proposed production rate, if something goes wrong ..... you know what I mean.
But risk can be good. I recently started to skydive .... and my life has "never" been better!
 Smile
I am so Fascinated by Boeing for doing this. Makes my life more interesting!


User currently offlineNudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 19
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 7183 times:

Sorry, Chiad, was not intending to bash you or so, the 787 is quite an impressive project, and if it runs down smoothly, that's quite something... let's hope for the best...


Putana da Seatbeltz!
User currently offlineAerosol From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 560 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 7147 times:

My thoughts on the 350 XBW:
- In contrast to the 787 it lacks a killer criteria (787: composite fuselage, bigger windows, inflight convenience through higher pressure)
- it is second to market
- it can easily be countered with a slightly improved 777
- Airbus still has two gaps in their family while Boeings is pretty much closed, though the Airbus family has a wider range and offers more commonality.
- only one engine for the -1000
But:
if composites show disadvantages in daily operations the winner will be the 350


User currently offlineJumpJet From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 293 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 7102 times:

Quoting Fleet Service - Reply 1

"Yes, that paper airplane certainly is a world beater isn't it?"

Let's not forget that the 787 isn't much better at the moment!  Wink


User currently offlineGlom From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2821 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 16 hours ago) and read 6977 times:

Quoting Aerosol (Reply 15):
In contrast to the 787 it lacks a killer criteria (787: composite fuselage, bigger windows, inflight convenience through higher pressure)

I heard Leahy was going to do a higher cabin pressure. How is a mystery. He's so busy try to one-up Boeing at this point that soon he'll be offering a cabin so humid that thunderstorms develop in it.

Quoting Aerosol (Reply 15):
it is second to market

So was the 777 and that just added to its humiliation of the Flying Pencil by getting customers to switch. However, the 777 had a decided advantage from a more optimised airframe, ETOPS engines etc. It is unclear what technological advantage the A350 will have and without it, the Airbus's Worst Nightmareliner will take and hold the majority of the market.

Quoting Aerosol (Reply 15):
it can easily be countered with a slightly improved 777

Given how much hot air Leahy is putting behind it, I'd be suprised if it needed to burn any fuel at all. The 777 could be advanced, but maybe not sufficiently without major investment. The last thing Boeing want to do is repeat the mistakes of the Flying Pencil, where they repeatedly bring out more souped up versions that refuse to sell. Of course, the A350-1000 will EIS 2014 at the earliest and so Y3 will be on the cards by then. In the mean time, the 777 has the market to itself.


User currently offlineFleet Service From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 623 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 12 hours ago) and read 6728 times:

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 8):
Fleet Service did not distinguish between schedule and performance misses in his crude A vs. B zinger.

It was a zinger period.Not anti Airbus and not pro Boeing.

I merely pointed out that promises made have not been kept.Yes, delivery promises have not been kept,and that should have been clarified and for that I humbly beg the mighty WingedMigrators mercy. :lol:

Both sides are getting far ahead of themselves as far as expected performance goes.



Yes, I actually *do* work for an airline,how about you?
User currently offlineCYatUK From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 811 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 6693 times:

I've got a few questions regarding both the A350XB and B787.

If an airline orders a B787 today, when it is the first available date for delivery?
Can this be a factor for airlines to switch to the A350?

Given that both A350XB and B787 are twin engined aircraft, how are airlines going to be operating the routes requiring 4 engines?
Bearing in mind the expected ETOPS approval of both planes, can the A350 and B787 used for every long haul route or will there be a need for 4 engined aircraft?



CY@Uk
User currently offlineKatekebo From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 706 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 11 hours ago) and read 6583 times:

Airbus made a strategic mistake in their product planning about 10 years ago. They decided to invest all their resources in the A380 program (which in my opinion was more politically and "penis-envy" motivated than economically justified), and believed that the A330/340 family could hold its ground against Boeing mid- and large-size family of B767, 777 and 747.

Now, they face a very disadventageous situation. They have a competitive small short-range airplane (A32x) and a modern but niche VLA (A380), with nothing in between in the 200 to 450 passenger range. The B787 has "killed" the A330 and B777 did the same to the A340.

The reality is that Airbus needs two different airplanes.

One that would compete with the B787, replace aging A300's and B767's and substitute the A330 in their product line - something in the 200 to 300 passenger range, with long-range capability, but also good mid-range economics.

They also need a second model, one that would cover the gap between 300 and 450 passengers, replace the A340 in Airbus product line-up, and "wipe out" the B777 and B748.

The problem is that such program is beyond Airbus economical and technical capability. They can only develop one airplane at a time, so they decided to go with something in between. This also avoids a direct comparison with the B787, where they could probably match the performance, but not beat it given current technology status (mainly engines), and gives them some advantage of the economy of scale in terms of CASM.

Is this an ideal solution? Definitely not, as it leaves two gaps in their product line-up - one on the lower side of the scale, and another one on the upper side. However, given current circumstances it is the best they can do. The new A350 will certainly be competitive and will probably achieve a fair market share against the B787-9 and the speculative B787-10, as well as dominate against the B777.

However, I believe that this decision will come and haunt them 10 years from now, as soon as Boeing launches the Y3 program. They will be now confronted with an airplane that fills better in the gap between the B787 and the A380, which will leapfrog the A350 in terms of technology and efficiency. This is how I expect the market share to look over the next 10 years:

B787-3 and -8: 100% of the market share because there is no competitor
B787-9 and -10 vs. A350-800 and -900: 50/50 split
B777-300ER vs. A350-1000: 30/70 split
B748 vs A380: 30/70 split (although they are not direct competitors)

However, as soon as the Y3 becomes available, the market share will change as follows:
Y3 (smaller versions) vs. A350-1000: 70/30
Y3 (larger versions) vs. A380 (smaller versions): 70/30

The A350 is clearly a compromise between two competing needs, and compromises are always sub-optimal solutions


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 6401 times:

Quoting Reggaebird (Thread starter):
Will Boeing be able to counter these weapons this time or should they be shuddering in their boots

I think the 350xwb is the airplane Boeing expected Airbus to counter with, if at all, three years ago when they started work in earnest on developing the 787. In this industry, you don't invest billions in a product without first spending countless hours trying to strategize what your rival's response will be.

Regardless of what a great airplane the 350xwb may turn out to be, the folks at Boeing must be smiling because, thus far, the 350 appears to be in rough parity with the 787 (if it is better it would only be marginally -- nothing that Boeing couldn't address with minor adjustments to their airframe). And where the 777 is concerned, the 350 is not a great leap in range or CASM advancement.

Boeing is smiling because they have the market to themselves for the next 4 - 6 years, minimum. Best of all for Boeing, Airbus has effectively abandoned the 200 - 280 seat market.

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 20):
Airbus made a strategic mistake in their product planning about 10 years ago. They decided to invest all their resources in the A380 program

I disliked tremendously Phil Condit but I will hand it to him: He definitely called this shot back in the 90's. At first he said Airbus would never build the A380 (A3XX) because the market wasn't there. But then when it looked imminent that the A3XX would be launched he said Airbus was making a strategic mistake that would tie up their resources for years and impact their ability to address other models in their product line.

As much as I disliked Condit, he was dead-on right on this issue.

[Edited 2006-07-18 22:54:11]


My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineGrantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 6236 times:

As the A350 is shaping up to be more of a B777 competitor than a B787 competitor, is the fuselage wider or narrower than the B777?

User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4576 posts, RR: 41
Reply 23, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 6182 times:

Quoting Grantcv (Reply 22):
is the fuselage wider or narrower than the B777?

It will be wider than the existing Airbus widebodies and the 787, but narrower than the 777.

V/F



"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10241 posts, RR: 97
Reply 24, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 6154 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 20):
The reality is that Airbus needs two different airplanes.

I certainly wouldn't disagree with that (if you've read my "product stratefy" comments).

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 20):
The A350 is clearly a compromise between two competing needs, and compromises are always sub-optimal solutions

.

They have positioned the A350X slap-bang in the middle of where the two famimles should be. If you look at where the MONEY is, though (i.e market size X value of each frame), they've positioned it slap-bang in the middle of that, too. In that respect, I think the A350X is BANG on target.

Given that I agree with NAV20 that Airbus only have the ability to develop one family at this time, and that the business has fairly compelling "throughput/turnover/profitability" requirements in the near-term, I don't believe they had much choice than to do exactly what they've done.

The compromise, though, is that the A350X positioning leaves a "gap" at either end, between the A320 at one end, and the A380 at the other. In that sense, it's sub-optimal, and that "sub-optimisation" may have longer-term consequences.
I don't actually think that the fact that it's positioned to overlap the bottom end of the 777 and the top end of the 787 makes the design itself sub-optimal in any way. It is what it is.

I can't possibly imagine that we could have arguments over the marketing case against the A350X in the way that is done against the A380.

Regards


User currently offlineGrantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 25, posted (8 years 5 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 6007 times:

So by the time the A350 arrives on the scene in 2012, Airbus will have the A320E Family, (gap), A350, (gap), A380 while Boeing will have possibly B797 (Y1/B737RS), B787, B777, B748. Boeing is still talking about the B737RS in about the same time frame as the A350. What is Airbus to do? How can they ever catch up?

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...
Boeing Won't Imitate Airbus' "Symbolic" China FAL posted Tue Oct 31 2006 09:03:15 by Leelaw
Airbus "Creates" A350 Client - Lesson For Boeing? posted Fri May 20 2005 17:20:10 by Reggaebird
Boeing And Airbus "Duopoly" posted Mon Feb 7 2005 21:34:32 by RootsAir
Airbus Unveils A380/Boeing Updates Its "Hupmobile" posted Thu Jan 20 2005 17:04:26 by Highflier92660
Boeing CEO: "Why Do (Airbus) Need Subsidies?" posted Fri Jul 2 2004 23:25:45 by Singapore_Air
Airbus Delivers First "A318 Double-Decker" posted Fri Jan 16 2004 18:05:29 by Dtwclipper
Airbus Answer To New Boeing "787", posted Sun Dec 22 2002 01:40:18 by Keesje
Should Boeing Be "Playing The Game"? posted Thu Jul 25 2002 04:01:09 by Reggaebird
Should Boeing Go "Stick?" posted Wed Mar 14 2001 23:59:48 by Ampropilot2b
Boeing Adds 34 Unidentified Orders-"737 & 787" posted Fri Sep 29 2006 03:01:51 by Halibut