Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Industry Says Boeing Needn't Fret Over A350XWB  
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4772 times:

LONDON — At a reception in London's Science Museum on Monday evening, members and guests of the International Society of Transport Aircraft Trading met to drink, eat hors d'oeuvres and talk commercial aviation.

With a lunar-landing vehicle to one side and a blue-laser light cycling dramatically overhead inside a giant transparent ring, it was a fine venue at which to gauge reaction to the big Airbus announcement of its new airplane family, branded the A350 XWB.

This group clearly didn't see the news as a dire turning point for Boeing...


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ospace/2003133769_a350react18.html

Interesting "news analysis" article, Mr. Gates conclusion after some cocktail converation with executives from GATX, ILFC, etc.: "[i]n time, airline bean counters are going to have to sift the data carefully. But it appears Boeing needn't panic right away."

Apparently, Mr. Olson of ILFC doesn't see the latest A350 design iteration as sure-fire "777 Killer."

[Edited 2006-07-18 07:39:25]

[Edited 2006-07-18 08:01:55]

31 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 1, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4736 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
Interesting article, Mr. Gates conclusion after some cocktail converation with executives from GATX, ILFC, etc.: "[i]n time, airline bean counters are going to have to sift the data carefully. But it appears Boeing needn't panic right away."

I found this to be interesting also...

""That's not a cheap proposition," said the executive. "The point is the airframe is not new; the bulk of the fuel efficiencies are in the engine.""

as well as.

"The "extra-wide body" A350 branding now plastered on billboards around Farnborough is justified, Leahy explained, because the A350 is wider than the 787. And as for the 777, well true, the Boeing plane has a wider fuselage; but if you installed standard eight-abreast seating in the Airbus plane and the nine-abreast standard in the 777, the A350's seats would be wider."

the problem is that this doesn't stack up to EK's 10-abreast on their 777's... spin 


apropos...thanks for the link. Smile



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineNudelhirsch From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 1438 posts, RR: 18
Reply 2, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 4694 times:

Gates? Isn't that the one who could not differ between freighter and pax planes just recently?

Just as Airbus has lost credibility, according to many people here, he has too...



Putana da Seatbeltz!
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4664 times:

Quoting Nudelhirsch (Reply 2):

No doubt Mr. Gates made a serious error in his report yesterday concerning the nature of the nascent Emirates 748 order, hopefully he's able to get his conversations at a cocktail party straight, considering some of the comments of industry executives reported in the article are on the record.

[Edited 2006-07-18 08:04:46]

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 4, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4616 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 1):
"The "extra-wide body" A350 branding now plastered on billboards around Farnborough is justified, Leahy explained, because the A350 is wider than the 787. And as for the 777, well true, the Boeing plane has a wider fuselage; but if you installed standard eight-abreast seating in the Airbus plane and the nine-abreast standard in the 777, the A350's seats would be wider."

I suspect the new A350's 8 abreast seating is going to be like 9 abreast on the 747. The 747 9 abreast configuration has wider seats than the 777, but they are just a bit too wide, so they were ditched by airlines. I think 8 abreast on the A350 will be relegated to premium economy.

With the 777, Boeing went below the mid point, so 9 abreast ended up being the preferred format (this would have the effect of protecting the 747 from competition, which might have been on Boeing's mind). With the 787, I think Boeing is coming closer to the midpoint, so that there will be more airlines using the which ever layout is less popular format than with the 747 and 777. And probably more airlines will consider 4 class layouts, or mixed fleets.

I think the real question is what does this enable in the forward cabin for the premium classes.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 5, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 4595 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):

I suspect the new A350's 8 abreast seating is going to be like 9 abreast on the 747. The 747 9 abreast configuration has wider seats than the 777, but they are just a bit too wide, so they were ditched by airlines. I think 8 abreast on the A350 will be relegated to premium economy.

With the 777, Boeing went below the mid point, so 9 abreast ended up being the preferred format (this would have the effect of protecting the 747 from competition, which might have been on Boeing's mind). With the 787, I think Boeing is coming closer to the midpoint, so that there will be more airlines using the which ever layout is less popular format than with the 747 and 777. And probably more airlines will consider 4 class layouts, or mixed fleets.

I think the real question is what does this enable in the forward cabin for the premium classes.

Will be interesting to see what happens when they do the "industrial launch" of the A350 3 months from now....

Premium economy will definitely be 8-abreast..I can't see it as the standard 9 abreast.....



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offline87dreamin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 4024 times:

Quoting Nudelhirsch (Reply 2):

Just for the record -- Gates didn't write the 747-8 pax story; Reuters is the agency that reported that. The desk at the Seattle Times tacked it onto the end of Dominic's story.


User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 84
Reply 7, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3937 times:

Yay for misquoting.

It says needn't fret right away. There is a huge difference.

One means wait to see if Airbus can follow through.
The other means Airbus has nothing.

N


User currently offlineN844AA From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3884 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 7):
Yay for misquoting.

It says needn't fret right away. There is a huge difference.

There is indeed a huge difference. However, in Leelaw's defense, I suspect he was constrained by the limitations of the title input box. He provided an accurate summary in the body of his post.



New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3884 times:

Here is the part that should still concern Airbus:

Move on, past the cocktail sausages.

Another senior industry figure agrees to be quoted, provided he is not identified.

The Airbus news conference, he said, "was a lot of show. They had to respond [to Boeing]. I'm not sure they'll be able to fulfill the product."

Sounds like there is stilla lack of confidence about Airbus ability to meet the numbers to me.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3854 times:

Quoting 87dreamin (Reply 6):
ust for the record -- Gates didn't write the 747-8 pax story; Reuters is the agency that reported that. The desk at the Seattle Times tacked it onto the end of Dominic's story.

Oh, he indicated to me, in replying to my e-mail questioning the veracity of what
the "Times" was reporting about the gravamen of the earlier Reuters story, that it was his error...perhaps he was "taking one for the team." In any event, he certainly acted very promptly to correct the error once the inconsistency was brought to his attention.


User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3505 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3838 times:

I like that a couple of guys at a cocktail party are sufficient to represent the "industry".  Wink


Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3793 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 11):
I like that a couple of guys at a cocktail party are sufficient to represent the "industry".

Well considering the fact that these are the heavyweights of the industry, I would say they could.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5576 posts, RR: 28
Reply 13, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3793 times:

Quoting 87dreamin (Reply 6):
Just for the record -- Gates didn't write the 747-8 pax story; Reuters is the agency that reported that. The desk at the Seattle Times tacked it onto the end of Dominic's story.

It's always interesting how things spread from source to source. One local Seattle tv website has been talking about the "180 passenger" Embraer 195 for days, and in two separate news pieces. You would think someone would be calling Boeing to see what they're going to do to compete  Smile.

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 7):
Yay for misquoting.

It says needn't fret right away. There is a huge difference.

One means wait to see if Airbus can follow through.
The other means Airbus has nothing.

I was thinking the same thing. I'm not really sure if there is much to the story, other than some initial reactions based on a PR blitz. If I were Boeing I'd be glad no one was raving, but I wouldn't feel too relaxed either.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3718 times:

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 7):
Yay for misquoting.

It says needn't fret right away. There is a huge difference.

Good job picking-up on the nuance in language, I merely attempted to duplicate the gravamen of the original headline in the space allotted when I started the thread: "Industry says Boeing needn't fret over rival's bid to recover."


User currently offlineKen777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 8269 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 3703 times:

Airbus has 100 days to fill in enough blanks to get airlines really interested in the XWB. Until then the XWB is good for Airbus because it shows the potential customers that there will be a heavy investment in a new plane to compete with the 787.

It's going to be a morale boost for Airbus employees as well, probably motivating a lot of engineers to put in some extra hours to make the XWB a powerhouse.

Until the blanks are filled in, however, Boeing can wait on a costly response. Might be why they decision for a second production line has been pushed back to next year.

[Edited 2006-07-18 22:22:51]

User currently offlineKaneporta1 From Greece, joined May 2005, 739 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (8 years 2 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3625 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 4):
I suspect the new A350's 8 abreast seating is going to be like 9 abreast on the 747. The 747 9 abreast configuration has wider seats than the 777, but they are just a bit too wide, so they were ditched by airlines. I think 8 abreast on the A350 will be relegated to premium economy.

Whatever all these "industry heavyweights" were discussing, the fact remains that customers asked for a true 3-3-3 A350 and this is what Airbus is going to give them. Unfortunately, we will only see the comfortable 2-4-2 config in premium economy from now on.
Anyhow, Boeing shouldn't be that "panicked", they already have plenty of orders for the 787. They will, however, get less than 70% of the market they currently have.



I'd rather die peacefully in my sleep, like my grandfather, not terrified and screaming, like his passengers
User currently offlineRIX From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 1787 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 2 months 22 hours ago) and read 3455 times:

Quoting Kaneporta1 (Reply 16):
true 3-3-3 A350

If A350 is only 3 inches wider than B787, I don't see how it is "more true" 3-3-3 than Boeing. It's less than 1 cm per seat for 9 abreast.

Quoting Kaneporta1 (Reply 16):
[Boeing] will, however, get less than 70% of the market they currently have.

- yet to be seen. The new A350 can be eventually a headache for 773, but how are they going to compete to 787 being 4 years later and already less technologically advanced (unless they declare some radical changes in these 3 months) - all these numbers won't leave paper. It still looks like they'd better "take their time" and attack 777 same way as 787 attacked 330. While instead they again presented something "improved in-between".


User currently offlineLotsamiles From United States of America, joined May 2005, 323 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (8 years 2 months 22 hours ago) and read 3427 times:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 11):
I like that a couple of guys at a cocktail party are sufficient to represent the "industry".

ISTAT represents the majority of people who buy / sell / finance commercial aircraft. Thus the name: International Society of Transport Aircraft Traders.
Plenty of heavyweight airline management folks are also involved.

I can't think of a better place to take the pulse of the industry.

Lotsamiles


User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4574 posts, RR: 41
Reply 19, posted (8 years 2 months 14 hours ago) and read 2926 times:

Quoting RIX (Reply 17):
I don't see how it is "more true" 3-3-3 than Boeing.

It isn't. It is more of a true 3-3-3 abreast than the previous Airbus widebodies up to and including the first A350 concept. It is ironic really - many people thought Airbus had got it right with their 2-4-2 layout, to the extent that Boeing tried to outdo their 8-abreast layout on the 787, only to pretty much consign 8-abreast to history and/or premium economy...

V/F



"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 2 months 14 hours ago) and read 2923 times:

Quoting Lotsamiles (Reply 18):
I can't think of a better place to take the pulse of the industry.

Very true. After all, it was at the annual ISTAT conference in Orlando that Mr. Udvar-Hazy "dropped the dime" on the "old all-new A350."

BTW, a colleague of mine who was in attendance tells me that some of the "old mandarins" at the party, who have seen many Leahy "dog and pony shows," were giggling about "Leahy, And The Angry Five Inches," as well as jokingly referring to "XWB" as "Xtra Wide Baloney."  Smile


User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (8 years 2 months 14 hours ago) and read 2874 times:

"""That's not a cheap proposition," said the executive. "The point is the airframe is not new; the bulk of the fuel efficiencies are in the engine."""


EH - the airframe is new - the whole dam thing's new?


User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 2 months 8 hours ago) and read 2660 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 20):
The Angry Five Inches

What's that about?


User currently offlineGrantcv From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 430 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 2 months 6 hours ago) and read 2516 times:

Quoting RIX (Reply 17):
yet to be seen. The new A350 can be eventually a headache for 773

How will the max 95,000lb thrust in the A350XBW's engines compete with the B773's 115,000lb thrust. That is a 20,000lb thrust difference isnt it? Surely the A350XBW would need something comparable?


User currently offlineColumba From Germany, joined Dec 2004, 7063 posts, RR: 4
Reply 24, posted (8 years 2 months 6 hours ago) and read 2498 times:

Apart from Udvar-Hazy´s comments and the announcement of EK not to decide on the 787 or A350XWB for another 6 months were there any other comments so far ?
I am wondering that LH has not said anything so far.



It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
25 Leelaw : I had to ask as well. It's a reference to the musical play/film "Hedwig and the Angry Inch" where the title character's botched sex-change surgery le
26 AirFrnt : In the seattle papers this morning, Boeing is making noises about improvements to the 777 to compete with the 35010.
27 AirMailer : Kaneporta1, I assume that you excluded the market segment that Boeing will get 100% of since Airbus won't be offering anything to compete with the 73
28 Ikramerica : This was my question. If the efficiency comes from the engine, then Boeing can use those engines or other engines with the same technologies when ava
29 MSYtristar : I'm so sick of this "777 killer" nonsense. Both aircraft will coexist. The T7 program will simply get upgraded by Boeing a few years from now to count
30 Post contains links BoeingBus : The biggest hurdle Airbus has is getting GE in the game and I really dont think they will do it, not yet at least. But I completely understand why GE
31 Post contains images Bicoastal : Extra hours? Remember, August is right around the corner. France shuts down for the month. Those Airbus engineers will soon board an Air France 777-3
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 Strategy Vs Airbus A350XWB/A320E/A380 posted Tue Jul 18 2006 03:43:01 by Baron95
Boeing Posts Orders Over $5.8 Bn This Week posted Sat Jun 3 2006 20:10:01 by BoomBoom
Boeing's Military Advantage Over Airbus? posted Sun Apr 30 2006 06:08:02 by Irobertson
A-I Flouted Safety Norms,says Boeing Instructor posted Sun Mar 26 2006 10:52:31 by MERLIN
Boeing Stock Soars Over $70 posted Tue Dec 13 2005 04:30:32 by Halibut
Boeing Not Panicking Over Bankruptcies posted Mon Sep 19 2005 04:05:05 by AirRyan
Boeing Preferred GE Over PW On The 757? posted Fri Aug 12 2005 18:56:20 by PM
AMR CEO Says Boeing 787 May Fit With Fleet Plan posted Wed Apr 20 2005 21:17:43 by AeroWesty
Giant Airbus Is A Giant Mistake, Says Boeing posted Wed Sep 22 2004 22:13:08 by Nyc777
Air Canada Says Boeing 7E7 "very Interesting" posted Tue Jun 1 2004 10:13:10 by Concord977