Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 12703 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.
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
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 66 Reply 9, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 12498 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.
Bringiton From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 866 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 12454 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 .
AirSpare From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 589 posts, RR: 6 Reply 11, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12252 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...
SparkingWave From South Korea, joined Jun 2005, 668 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 12241 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?
Flights to the moon and all major space stations. At Pan Am, the sky is no longer the limit!
Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 15, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 12100 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.
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.
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.
Justloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 871 posts, RR: 1 Reply 17, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 11967 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.
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 18, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11907 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.
Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11899 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...
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 66 Reply 21, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11858 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.
Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 22, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11839 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.
Zvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 66 Reply 24, posted (6 years 6 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 11786 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...
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 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 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 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 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 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 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 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