Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
ATW: Airbus Considering Revisions, Delays To A350  
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 13817 times:

Airbus is moving toward another radical rethink of its A350 XWB that may include a composite fuselage that will combat the 787 and leapfrog the 777-200ER.

According to Airbus insiders, the latest revision will push the A350's entry into service to at least 2014...

...Insiders say the company will use the upheaval surrounding its massive Power8 restructuring plans--aimed at rectifying design and production inefficiences that have bedeviled the A380--to relaunch the A350 XWB with a composite fuselage after key customers told the manufacturer it "still [has] not done enough" to combat the 787. It had been looking at a larger XWB to better match the 777-300ER but that initiative, as alluded to by Udvar-Hazy, was taking the weight of the aircraft too far away from the 787-8.


http://atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=6873

Perhaps the parade of A350 design "iterations" hasn't quite concluded?

[Edited 2006-10-25 08:05:24]

146 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 13815 times:

For the love of God!

What was that Airbus said about composites...

[Edited 2006-10-25 07:52:36]

User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2754 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 13760 times:

Does this make a updated A330 with GEnx / Trent 1700 engines more possible? The 787 will be flying in about two years, and Airbus is at least six years behind.


Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12266 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 13721 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 1):
What was that Airbus said about composites...

I've obviously forgotten what Airbus said, what did Airbus say? Obviously Airbus to going to be studing Boeings B787 introduction and assembly very closly to combat problems the A350XWB (if ever launched) may encounter during assembly and delivery


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 4, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13700 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 1):
What was that Airbus said about composites...

Airbus said composite technology wasn't ready for making a composite fuselage. Perhaps by 2015 or so the technology will be ready.  Smile

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 2):
Does this make a updated A330 with GEnx / Trent 1700 engines more possible?

Yes, I think so. It would be a big benefit to the A330F and help keep the passenger A330 in the game for several more years (while the B787 has a long backlog).


User currently offline777ER From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 12266 posts, RR: 18
Reply 5, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13673 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
FORUM MODERATOR

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 1):
What was that Airbus said about composites...

Airbus said composite technology wasn't ready for making a composite fuselage. Perhaps by 2015 or so the technology will be ready.

Ah, thanks


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13656 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 4):
Airbus said composite technology wasn't ready for making a composite fuselage. Perhaps by 2015 or so the technology will be ready

Perhaps the only evidence of "ramp rash" will be on Mr. Leahy's red face.  rotfl 


User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Reply 7, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13640 times:

I wonder which kind customers

"told the manufacturer it "still [has] not done enough" to combat the 787."

Interesting.

SIA must be extremely irritated though. Considering the A350 is supposed to do FCO and CPH I suspect and routes such as that, the A330 is insufficient isn't it?

Either way. Let's just hope Airbus gets its act together quick. The industry is getting impatient.



Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21562 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13639 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
leapfrog the 777-200ER.

According to Airbus insiders, the latest revision will push the A350's entry into service to at least 2014...

I would hope that a plane with an EIS would leapfrog a plane with an EIS 17 years earlier.

If it didn't, what would be the point in building it to begin with?

Unfortunately for Airbus, they've waited SO long that they will be bumping up against Boeing's first Y3 jets in 2016. And if Airbus is delayed at all...

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 2):
Does this make a updated A330 with GEnx / Trent 1700 engines more possible?

I think they could launch the 330F/334/335 at one time, and EIS them by 2010 if they do it now.

But they aren't going to do it. Unfortunately.

What's so dumb is that they could have done this, just as Leahy said they would, and had EIS in Q1 2009 if they had just listened to him... Big grin



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 9, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13612 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
I would hope that a plane with an EIS would leapfrog a plane with an EIS 17 years earlier.

I don't think there was ever any real question that the "new all-new" A350 would leapfrog the B777. The question was how competitive it would be against the B787.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 8):
Unfortunately for Airbus, they've waited SO long that they will be bumping up against Boeing's first Y3 jets in 2016.

IF (big IF) Boeing ever build a Y3, then 2016 is the earliest plausible date for EIS. If Airbus will build a "newer all-new" A350 with a CFRP fuselage, they would do well to be mindful of a possible Y3.


User currently offlineBringiton From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 866 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 13568 times:

I think the Date is pushing it a bit . If they were to launch the program by end of this year why in the world would they need 7 years to come up with the EIS of the first aircraft ?? I am sorry but that is simply not acceptable because your competition is doing it in 4 years . A near 45% parity in Launch to EIS is not acceptable . Moreover what about the 777300ER ? What will compete agains it ? If they go in the direction of providing an aircraft more in the SIZE and MARKET of the 787 then they would loose the Competitive edge with the XWB-1000 against the 300ER and possibly 747-8I . Its a real catch 22 situation for Airbus They had the 777 taking away market share agains the 340 and decided to pursue it and then steven and others warned that the 787 would eat away the market of the smaller 330 sized aircrafts . Would it be better now to launch the original A330-->A350 now and launch a 777 competitor in 2016 timeframe with 2 different fues. and wings ? It would perhaps cost 2-3 billion more but would make them much much more competitive in the market .

User currently offlineAirSpare From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 589 posts, RR: 6
Reply 11, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13366 times:

A is doing more speculating then a.netters.

While Randy has recently stated that B will look next towards a Y1 launch, I don't believe it, smells and looks like smoke and mirrors. The Y1 class is still selling like hotcakes, why would they launch a replacement?

I said before, and I think that it's possible Y3 will come first (I'm a minority on a.net on this).

Move the 787-10 to the Y3 class, offer 3 versions from -10 to the 747I capacities. B's CFRP experience (and supply chain) will be a decade ahead of A's, they could (IMHO) leapfrog the 350 even with a later authorization to offer, with an earlier in service date.

EIS for Y3-2012-2013

It is amazing that companies like TAM have been silent on the 350.

I'd love to peer inside the motor head VPs, and see what they have on the drawing board, or running in test cells, for Y1 and Y3 class aircraft.

While I'm spec'lating, A may need to order a few 747LCFs to move these pieces around...  Smile



Get someone else for your hero worship fetish
User currently offlineSparkingWave From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 674 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 13355 times:

Airbus doesn't have the experience and the know-how yet to build composites. Will they be able to amass it in 8 years? And by then, will a composite A350 be competitive with the the 2014 version of the B777? Or the B787? And what new marvelous innovations will Boeing have on the table by then? I can't wait to see...

It's wonderful that Airbus can promise the world, but in the end, who is it that can actually deliver it on time?

SparkingWave ~~~



Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
User currently offlineAp305 From India, joined Jan 2000, 606 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13311 times:

Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 12):
Airbus doesn't have the experience and the know-how yet to build composites.

errrr..... are you sure about that?. Last time I checked- rather large parts of every airbus airliner from the a300-600 to the a380 are made of composites

ap305

[Edited 2006-10-25 10:33:21]

[Edited 2006-10-25 10:34:26]

User currently offlineJohnny From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13305 times:

A i heard from internal Airbus sources and also read in an interview, Airbus always wanted to introduce a composite fuselage, but later than Boeing with the B787.

They said something about a second generation composite fuselage which can be build without rivets.
This was their official version why they waited.The truth? I do not think so...

They were able to produce big airplane parts, but not an entire fuselage in my opinion.

The A330 with Genx is a MUST to cover the gap!


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 13214 times:

Just reading the story, it looks like the A350XWB is being transformed into a real Y2.5, sitting in between the 787 and future Y3, using identical (yet improved second generation) composite technologies as on the 787.

Although it may be amusing to get yet another iteration of the A350, this plan should really worry Boeing, since it intends to splash a completely new and undoubtably highly competitive composite plane right into their well defined long term product strategy (Y2/Y3) which they have just set out to materialize as well as try to cut short the life cycle of the first generation composite 787 which will have just started off by then.
In fact, from a strategic point of view, this plane would basically do what the 787 did to the product strategy and product cycles of Airbus' wide body range!

If Airbus can sufficiently bridge the extra time needed with an A330NG, this idea actually sounds really good! The first iterations of the A350 showed an A330NG would definitely gain bigger market share than Boeing's stopgap (the 767-4ER) for what would later become the Y2/787 and any investment in this A330NG plane could be used also for the A330F, so I bet this report will cause some unease with Boeing.

[Edited 2006-10-25 11:21:02]

User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 16, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13124 times:

Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 12):
Airbus doesn't have the experience and the know-how yet to build composites. Will they be able to amass it in 8 years?

Of course Airbus could build a CFRP fuselage within 8 years if they were to start development now -- probably within 4 or 5 if they were not distracted by the WhaleJet.

Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 12):
And by then, will a composite A350 be competitive with the the 2014 version of the B777?

A CFRP A350 would almost certainly eat the B777's lunch.

Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 12):
Or the B787?

Hard to say.

Quoting SparkingWave (Reply 12):
And what new marvelous innovations will Boeing have on the table by then? I can't wait to see...

We'll have to wait and see. After all the innovation in the B787, it makes sense for Boeing to make evolutionary changes for a while.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 14):
The A330 with Genx is a MUST to cover the gap!

I'm not sure that it's a must, but I think it's a good idea.  Smile

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 15):
Just reading the story, it looks like the A350XWB is being transformed into a real Y2.5, sitting in between the 787 and future Y3, using identical (yet improved second generation) composite technologies as on the 787.

That would be the sweet spot! Go Airbus!  Smile


User currently offlineJustloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 1063 posts, RR: 1
Reply 17, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13081 times:

Quoting Bringiton (Reply 10):
I think the Date is pushing it a bit. If they were to launch the program by end of this year why in the world would they need 7 years to come up with the EIS of the first aircraft ??

The Sonic Cruiser R&D I think brings Boeing closer to 8 years. A should need a little less since much of the R&D, design direction, sizing, market has already been validated by Boeing and customers. 7 years sounds about right on paper, but I think Streiff's gut reaction is the correct one - 10 years. They need to get in the composite game fast and a major A350XWB effort around Al-Li is a strategic mistake. They can't afford another one.


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13021 times:

Quoting Justloveplanes (Reply 17):
They need to get in the composite game fast and a major A350XWB effort around Al-Li is a strategic mistake. They can't afford another one.

Then thank god for Mr. Forgeard, the extra $500M he directed towards composites research last spring must have paid some very early dividends in order to convince the Airbus brain-trust, particularly Mr. Leahy, that after several years of rather loud hand-wringing, a composite hull can be manufactured which will be "viable" in commercial service. What are the next epiphanies to come: a common engine pylon, and systems run with bleedless engines.

[Edited 2006-10-25 12:12:12]

User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 13013 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 16):
Of course Airbus could build a CFRP fuselage within 8 years if they were to start development now -- probably within 4 or 5 if they were not distracted by the WhaleJet.

Where does the 2014 date come from?

Is it based on today's estimations, or does it take into account the situation around the end of the decade, when the A350XWB program would really have to gain speed.

CFRP technology will now quickly mature (and it is not like Airbus has never heard of composites; they just don't seem to think they are ready to be used for entire fuselages yet) and also the Power8 program aims at reducing the time from design to production by 20% by 2010, so these 2 things combined lead me to believe 8 years sounds like a very conservative estimation even from today's perspective...


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 20, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 12980 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 19):
so these 2 things combined lead me to believe 8 years sounds like a very conservative estimation even from today's perspective...

Are you saying that if Airbus opts for the composite fuse, then the EIS could well be past 2014?

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 19):
they just don't seem to think they are ready to be used for entire fuselages yet

? ? ? What about the 787? Or are you referring to Airbus only?

BTW, does anyone else "out there" think EADS should have stuck to their guns and build the A350 version that was to have been introduced by 2010?



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 21, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 12972 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 19):
CFRP technology will now quickly mature (and it is not like Airbus has never heard of composites; they just don't seem to think they are ready to be used for entire fuselages yet) and also the Power8 program aims at reducing the time from design to production by 20% by 2010, so these 2 things combined lead me to believe 8 years sounds like a very conservative estimation even from today's perspective...

I agree with all of that, except that I don't believe that Airbus really thought CFRP fuselages were not viable at the time they said it. I think that was just marketing BS because they got caught off-guard.


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 12953 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 18):
Then thank god for Mr. Forgeard, the extra $500M he directed towards composites research last spring must have paid some very early dividends in order to convince the Airbus brain-trust, particularly Mr. Leahy, that after several years of rather loud hand-wringing, a composite hull can be manufactured which will be "viable" in commercial service. What are the next epiphanies to come: a common engine pylon, and systems run with bleedless engines.

Any corporation will defend all of their strategic choices untill the moment they are ready to drop them for something else... Need you be reminded about some recent comments from Boeing regarding the obvious handicaps of some of their narrow body planes compared to Airbus' competing models? I suggest you read the Baseler blog on the 737 carefully and keep it in might when Boeing announces all the 'great advantages' of the plane which will come out of the Y1 study; it will most certainly give some funny reading then....
Fact is Boeing too have changed their mind in the past and as so often the one who comes in second has the advantage to see what the other has done, learn from it and improve it, while the first one is locked into the process.

If Leahy can come out with a technologically supperior plane which basically wrecks the entire product stategy of Boeing by splashing in right into the middle of their Y2/Y3 product line, I don't think he'll mind for a second to have to say that after long research, they have decided to use a CFRP fuselage.... all that needs to be stessed is that it will be second generation and thus more advanced, or alternatively give it a new name, and off he goes to sell it...
It only takes 3 seconds to eat your own words, it takes a life time however to deal with the consequences of not wanting to do so when you should have.


User currently offlineAerosol From Germany, joined Oct 2000, 559 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 12937 times:

What Airbus needs to realize is that they - as painful as it might be - lost the 350 segment. If they are developing it they will develop an aircraft with EIS far behind its competitor.

This would be my approach: skip the 350 - do a refined 330 and focus on the a composite 320 - to get ahead of Boeing in Airbus' brad and butter segment.

My two cents.


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 24, posted (8 years 4 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 12900 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 20):
BTW, does anyone else "out there" think EADS should have stuck to their guns and build the A350 version that was to have been introduced by 2010?

Do you mean the 2nd or 3rd version that was floated to the airlines? I think they should have gone with the 1st version, but as an interim measure.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 22):

Any corporation will defend all of their strategic choices untill the moment they are ready to drop them for something else...

 checkmark  That's true, but some corporations tend to keep quieter about their mistakes and others tend to put their foot deeply down their throat. Airbus were in a position where they had to say something, but they may have gone a bit far in bashing CFRP fuselages.


25 Slz396 : Quite on the contrary... EIS should not have to be that far off at all... I am not talking about the technology as such, but rather about the economi
26 Justloveplanes : I do. I think A got off track by the very public dissing from Udvar-Hazy, Clark and Cheng. A was not caught off-guard by the 787 to my mind despite t
27 MBJ2000 : What was the 1st version again, "just" a refined wing and new engines?
28 Justloveplanes : It's not possible to wreck a correct product strategy. You can only match it or improve upon it. I know the A380 bashing gets out of control on occas
29 Post contains images Lumberton : My feeling is that whatever QR wanted "up to 60" of, that's what they should have gone with. The ATWO article contains this remark: The part that sho
30 Leelaw : Of course nobody in the industry will take that kind of explanation seriously. IMO, Mr. Leahy's continued viability as uber-salesman will largely dep
31 Post contains images 11Bravo : I agree, that's troubling. Given the A380 nonsense and the never ending series of A350 EIS delays this statement might be reasonably taken to mean 20
32 Post contains images Zvezda : Yes, the B787-8 is extremely conservative i.e. heavy. Flight testing should provide opportunities for optimizing later models. My recollection is tha
33 RJ111 : IMO Airbus shouldn't worry too much about the EIS date and focus on making the A350 the best aircraft they can possibly make - take no prisoners. The
34 Revelation : All these recent events show what a great plane 787 is. The airline insiders who have access to 787 data we don't have are saying even the currently p
35 DeltaDAWG : Isn't the Y1 and A320NG? the real question here. The 777/787's & 330/350/380's get the limelight but what is it that keeps the lights on and the heat
36 Revelation : How aggressive can Airbus be on their first all-composite airframe? I agree, but Boeing will also have this knowledge, and the opportunity to use it
37 Post contains images Jacobin777 : To the people saying that 2014 is "conservative".. "According to Airbus insiders, the latest revision will push the A350's entry into service to at le
38 Post contains images RAPCON : Yeah, right. Will this be a sort of A380-type of worry, or a new and unexpected worry? Maybe Leahy will provide further input on the worry sometime i
39 Revelation : It's a really good question. Early 737RS/A320NSR studies show with what is currently known (including projected improvements), there won't be enough
40 Parapente : This has been a good thread so far. It is really difficult to see the way ahread for Airbus. If for no other reason than they are running out of money
41 Lumberton : I know this is slightly off topic, but would you want to lull your opponent into thinking that you're content to cash checks on the 737 program and t
42 Stitch : Moving to an all-composite A350 would give Airbus a significant edge in replacing 777s and A340s that come due in the late 2010s. We'll be looking at
43 Osiris30 : Does this mean the board said no to the launch they wanted to do by the end of the year? (anyone?)
44 Zvezda : If the cost to airlines to buy airliners increases (which it would without competition) then the cost of fares will also rise.
45 NYC777 : Well this is hardly a surprise. First Airbus certainly bet wrong on the A380, misjudging the market for the A380 and totally ignored a market they say
46 Curmudgeon : There have been a couple of odd things mentioned in my wide circle of friends lately that have only made sense in the context of an almost imminent Y1
47 Katekebo : I think that before agonizing on the technical details of the A350, Airbus needs to bring clarity to their product strategy. Given that they no longer
48 Ap305 : Airbus is going through what boeing went through a few years back. No matter what they say it appears to lack credibility. There have been too many fa
49 Revelation : I'm sure in any case there will be ongoing studies, that should go without saying. Maybe it's disinformation, but all we've heard so far is that Y1 i
50 Columba : So I see a LH order for the 787 soon......
51 Kangar : Airbus is a perfect example of what happens when the right people don't have all the power. The wrong people get it.
52 Zvezda : The A350 doesn't need to be the same size as the B777-300ER to replace it. It just needs to have better economics with at least the range. Airlines d
53 RJ111 : Congradulations on another highly objective post NYC777 but aren't you forgetting the 787 is the remnants of the sonic cruiser? Did Boeing get that o
54 Mptpa : We really do not know what Boeing is upto in terms of the 777 successor.... it may be already in progress, but wait for how the processes work in ter
55 NYC777 : The Sonic Cruiser was a casulty of the 9/11 or did you forget that? They ignored the 787 and belittled Boeing because of their arrogance and underest
56 Post contains images AirSpare : If B's statements on CFRP cycle fatigue are correct, there may not be much of a replacement cycle in 2025. A has no choice but to butt heads against
57 Lumberton : IIRC, didn't Mr. Mayrhuber say they would wait and see what Airbus comes up with?
58 Zvezda : I see the B787 as the B777 successor. They are both 9 abreast airliners with similar range.
59 RJ111 : Pah, so the A380 wasn't affected by 9/11 and Airbus got the market wrong? 9/11 was conveniant timing.
60 NYC777 : Yeah but if there is an EIS of 2014, LH may not wait that much longer and see 787 production slots snapped up even more faster than they are now.
61 Sphealey : > The Y1 class is still selling like hotcakes, > why would they launch a replacement? Well, in any sort of contest the best time to bury your competit
62 NYC777 : Yeah, how many VLA have they sold since product launch? How many have they sold this year? Haw many has Boeing sold? The answer, not many!
63 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Not if you ask EK and TG... Don't be surprised to see more carriers attempt this in the future....the economics of this can't ignored...
64 AirSpare : I agree with you 100%, but my conclusion is a Y3 launch prior to a Y1 launch. B is talking openly (behind closed doors) with Southwest and Gol on a 7
65 Columba : That is what I was thinking.
66 Johnny : Then i guess they go the B777-200LR/F/300ER-way. Johnny
67 NYC777 : The truth will come out in the next few weeks about what form the A350 will take. If it'll actually be launched and when, if launched, it can be expec
68 SNATH : Not only that... they more time they have to prepare an answer to Airbus' product. Tony
69 Post contains images Zvezda : I don't see how Y1/NSR will have 30% better fuel economy than the A320/B737NG. I think 20% is probably more realistic. Sadly, you may be right. I don
70 Post contains images MauriceB : Wow another delay!? so, if this is the date Airbus aimes to have it EIS, you will probably see the first flight in 2016
71 AirSpare : Jaja, yea, my post was pretty murky. It was a compliment. I started a post, then changed it "If the 748I is canceled..." as part of my reasoning for
72 NYC777 : It all depends on what the engine manufactueres can do.
73 AirFrnt : Airbus may be trying to kill two birds with one stone here. Remember that it was design and production problems, as well as a organizational maginot
74 Zvezda : I think 3 years is the minimum plausible temporal separation between Y1 and Y3 (if the latter ever gets built). Boeing would be completely exposed if
75 AndesSMF : But with all the delays, their timeline now works to 2014. And 2014 IS later.
76 NYC777 : I disagree... If Airbus listened to their customers there wouldn't have been a need for one revsion let alone 5 to 6!!! The fact that they're now say
77 Shenzhen : I thinks it would be prudent for Boeing to have some space between launching airplane models, or they find themselves in the same position as Airbus
78 Stitch : Airbus is essentially considering launching a CFRP 777. However, if the rumblings of Airbus considering using CFRP panels instead of aluminum on tradi
79 SNATH : Zvezda, You seem pessimistic about Y3's chances of getting developed. Just curious: is that your opinion or you heard something to that effect? If it
80 Stitch : I can understand Zvezda's skepticism because Boeing has the 787-10 and the 747-8, could conceivably have the 787-11, and could work to lighten the 777
81 DAYflyer : What strikes me is that this new airplane may end up not leapfrogging anything at all. Boeing could develop an 777 replacement based on 787 technolog
82 Osiris30 : RJ111 is fairness: The sonic cruiser was one attempt (plus one for the 787). The 350 has gone through how many public iterations? (let's exclude mino
83 Zvezda : Boeing have said they will definitely offer a B787-10. That is already 12 sq meters more cabin floor area than the B777-200 (291.0 vs 279.0). It woul
84 Post contains links Leelaw : Don't know, although FI reported on Monday that Airbus would go to EADS board for launch approval by early November, see: FI: Airbus To Ask Board To
85 N844AA : But the market was there for the Sonic Cruiser -- AA apparently seriously considered buying out something like the first few years of production -- u
86 BoomBoom : This caught my eye: " target=_blank>http://atwonline.com/news/story.html...=6873 Not only is Airbus far behind on composite fuselage technology, but a
87 Zvezda : Boeing considered a B777-400X more than once. The idea was finally put to rest for good when Boeing launched the B747-8 SuperJumbo. I don't think it
88 Post contains images Rheinbote : Second that except for the 'perhaps'
89 Osiris30 : Zvezda: While we usually agree on most things, I think you're wrong here. I think Boeing will limit the 787 line at the -10. I think Boeing would lik
90 Post contains images Boeingfever777 : Nothing a second line wouldn't clear up. LOL... For Airbus it's acceptable.
91 Post contains links Revelation : Quoting FI: I also tend to agree: I don't see B launching a 737 for "only" a 10% overall improvement in efficiency. Maybe they can justify it if the
92 Rheinbote : There's word that Boeing may tackle the DC-9/MD-80 replacement market first. Randy said "we have no interest in regional aircraft" very recently, so
93 MD-90 : Now Airbus fans know what it's like to be a Mississippi State fan in competition with the Auburns and LSUs of the world.
94 TrojanAE : Labas Zvezda. I recently talked to one of the top managers of the 787 program, and he quickly confirmed that the 787-10 is close to being officially
95 NYC777 : Wow that's some great news. Did this official give atime frame as to when they'll announce the launch and who will be the initial operators?
96 Post contains images Osiris30 : Now folks, Let's put 2 and 2 together: Add that to: Which is correct.. that leaves only:
97 Boeingfever777 : Well being EK was pushing for this the most i'm sure they will be the launch customer if it does takeoff.
98 NYC777 : I thikn they said they're going to take their time and probably won't be making an announcement till April or May of next year. They want to evaluate
99 Stitch : Agreed. The Sonic Cruiser is more akin to the A340-8000. Which makes sense because, for now, Boeing has no competition to the 777. If they hinted at,
100 Douwd20 : Isn't the root cause Airbus's desire to attack two aircraft (787 and 777) with one model? -----Udvar-Hazy also questioned whether the plane-builder wo
101 Ikramerica : First, the 797 does not need to be 20% better than the 737NG. It needs to be 15-20% better than the MD80s/737Classic/Early A320s. These are the fleets
102 Post contains images Zvezda : This is the conventional wisdom and I've never said it wouldn't work out this way. I've only said that it might not. It's certainly possible that Boe
103 Post contains images Ikramerica : Z- I respect you and expect you to read more carefully. I was listing the same old mistakes Boeing made, and that this was one mistaken bit of logic
104 Zvezda : Sorry. It's been a long day. It's clear now. Thanks.
105 SK736 : Maybe the same as Boeing said about the market for large aircraft, just before launching a larger 747.
106 Shenzhen : I would say that the 787-9 has already killed the 777-200ER. A 787-10 will start killing the 777-300ER. Follow your own RASM/CASM/Airplane size rule,
107 Post contains images Zvezda : Yes, I agree completely. It's surprising how few see this. It I were running an airline, the only reason I would order B777-300ERs rather than B787-1
108 Post contains images Jacobin777 : or if you are EK and need 10-abreast...
109 TrojanAE : No I asked him about that in fact, and he just smiled and told me to wait for the press announcement. He said at the moment they are not worrying too
110 Osiris30 : Agreed. I don't see much of a future for the 777 either, apart from the gimme business for the next few years. But I don't see Boeing bringing the 78
111 Ruscoe : I don't understand why a place betwen the 787 and the 777 is considered a "sweet spot". It might just as well be labled "no mans land", and that is ex
112 Atmx2000 : If by right away you mean the next six years, you would be right. No -10 will appear for at least that long. Even then the 777-300ER is in a differen
113 ScottB : Actually, I would postulate that reducing manufacturing cost could be the most compelling reason for moving forward with Y1/737RS in the short term.
114 Ken777 : Some Ramblings With a possible delay in the 350 it would be interesting to know how the engine manufacturers are going to react. As I understand it, G
115 Osiris30 : That's where I think Boeing is going to go first with the Y1 stuff. It will cut the legs out from the 736, but that never really had any in the first
116 Post contains links and images Revelation : Thanks for your informative post, even though it pours water on my idea of Boeing milking the 737 for a while and bringing on the 777 replacement soo
117 Boeing767-300 : I cannot believe this thread. It just keeps getting worse for Airbus. Singapore recently signed a LOI for 20 XWB and now they want to delay it and rev
118 Ruscoe : I doubt Singapore will be concerned at all. The Sigapore 350 XWB order, on top of the need to keep Singapore on the 380 program gives Singapore a gre
119 Post contains images Zvezda : SQ want good airliners at good prices. Influence with Airbus is interesting only to the extent that it helps them with that. Maybe they wanted a scor
120 Ikramerica : Because they have to divide them randomly among their carriers, so 20 seemed like as good a number as any. Not like they really have any idea what ea
121 Grantcv : The A380s problems are apparently due to Airbus using different versions of CATIA. The A350s problems are apparently due to Airbus using PowerPoint i
122 MrComet : Yes, Airbus will leap frog it by then technologically but the 777 may have a number of good years left in it based on cost. It's a pretty efficient p
123 N328KF : That's a pretty succinct explanation. By way of comparison, during the investigation of NASA's Columbia space shuttle failure, the investigating comm
124 Post contains links N844AA : Off-topic, but additional reading if anyone's interested: http://www.edwardtufte.com/bboard/q-...01yB&topic_id=1&topic=Ask+E%2eT%2e
125 Dank : That assumes that the 787 and the 777 would never overlap themselves. Say an airline wants high end 787s and 777s (say, EK), wouldn't a plane that co
126 Zvezda : Yes, of course. It appears you may be assuming that Y3 will have a B777-like cross section. That seems unlikely to be the case. If Boeing build a Y3,
127 Post contains images Dank : Sorry if what I wrote came out a little wrong. What I meant was that if an airline decides (and EK is probably not the right one since they want bigg
128 Zvezda : That will certainly be true for some airlines. It's one of the reasons why I expect the A350 to eventually do well. I may have been the first to expr
129 Post contains images Dank : It is a delicate game that the manufacturers have to play. They want to be all things to all people, but you can't do that. You have to pick your bat
130 FlyDreamliner : Yeah. I know. If Airbus had stuck with the original A350, which was basically the modernized A330 with new engines and some weight savings - that wou
131 Zvezda : I think the main factor will be the extent to which fragmentation reduces the demand for VLAs. Whether or not the WhaleJet ever starts selling again
132 Post contains images Astuteman : I guess two points for consideration here are:- Firstly, Boeing has no need to rush any decision regarding Y3 (indeed shouldn't). Secondly, given the
133 Zvezda : Jean Pierson was replaced by Noel Forgeard. Let's hope that, with Forgeard's departure, Airbus can return to making great airliners. I agree with all
134 Dank : I agree. Just that what Airbus decides to do (or what they can handle vis a vis financial dificulties), will influence when and how Boeing decides to
135 SSTsomeday : It must be difficult/painful for an airline to order mid-life A/C for a short period in order to add capacity or replace gas guzzlers while they wait
136 Zvezda : SQ wanted to replace their A340-500s with B777-200LRs but found that the resale value of the former was too low to make the deal worthwhile.
137 Post contains links Leelaw : ...Clark also was asked about the A350XWB, the plane that Airbus has said it will develop to challenge Boeing's 787 as well as the bigger 777. In July
138 Zvezda : I think EK have but little choice other than to order some A350s to cover current and future cancellations of other Airbus models.
139 PlaneHunter : Please elaborate... PH
140 Post contains links BoomBoom : http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/27/business/airbus.php
141 Justloveplanes : Hello Shenzhen, For the less informed among us, can you elaborate on the above rule a bit? Thanks!
142 Post contains images Osiris30 : Man these guys sure are capacity hungry.. I wonder just where they plan on getting all the pax to fill those seats at a decent yield... Either they a
143 Jacobin777 : EK still have a number of routes where they want to fly to..besides JFK, North America and South America is untapped...(but they can't get any flight
144 Dank : " target=_blank>http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/...s.php Hey Boom Boom, Thanks for the quote. That sort of confirms what I was thinking was going
145 Post contains links Leelaw : Geoff Thomas of ATWonline is reporting today than an announcement of the change to the "all-composite airframe" for the A350 is expected in early Nove
146 Brendows : That doesn't surprise me... There is a reason why I've mentioned the lacking payload/range-capabilities of the A350 for the last few days. The way th
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 Considering Response To A 757/767 Successor posted Mon Jul 29 2002 01:54:42 by Klaus
Airbus Considering Rival To New Boeing Aircraft posted Fri Apr 6 2001 14:43:42 by B757300
Airbus Planning Russian Venture For A350 posted Fri Nov 17 2006 14:39:03 by NYC777
QR Confirms 777 Order, Sticks To A350 Order posted Tue Sep 12 2006 04:12:02 by Manni
Airbus A380 Who's Next To Jump Onboard? posted Sat Sep 2 2006 13:34:11 by WINGS
Airbus A300-600 Lufthansa To Cyprus posted Mon Aug 7 2006 23:42:02 by Reifel
1000 Airbus Engineers From Germany To Toulouse? posted Sat Jul 29 2006 21:12:36 by Lufthansi
Airbus' Williams: Seven Ways To Fix The A380 posted Sun Jul 16 2006 18:03:16 by Leelaw
Airbus Eyes 3 New Planes To Battle Boeing posted Fri Jul 14 2006 16:06:15 by Okelleynyc
AIRBUS: Plans Not Tied To Farnborough posted Tue Jul 11 2006 21:05:00 by RAPCON