BoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (8 years 5 months 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 9247 times:
From today's WSJ:
Quote: Customers have been clamoring for more information. Since presenting an overview of the jetliner in July, Airbus has shown customers a variety of plans, but it has yet to commit to a firm configuration, customers say.
According to people familiar with the campaign, US Airways has been in talks with both Airbus and Boeing but is leaning toward sticking with Airbus. Airbus has offered favorable terms on pricing as well as agreeing to renegotiate terms on A320s the airline ordered, these people say. Airline officials remain concerned about whether Airbus will deliver the A350 by 2013 as promised.
US Airways has asked Airbus officials to come back with a proposal that would include financial penalties if it fails to deliver. John Leahy, Airbus's chief operating officer for customers, said in an interview that "US Airways would of course have penalty payments" if the plane is late or fails to perform as advertised.
CygnusChicago From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (8 years 5 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8991 times:
What's interesting is that in the picture, which claims to be sourced from Airbus, they show the A350 as an 8-abreast. Guessing they incorrectly used an old graphic.
Other interesting point, is
Quote: The plane's designers have been accompanying Airbus marketing officials on sales calls. Gordon McConnell, the chief engineer of the A350, said he has been explaining to potential buyers that Airbus is selecting suppliers and production partners and has more than 750 engineers and specialists working on the project.
Hopefully this means that there is immediate alignment between Leahy and the engineering corps on the planes specifications, so airlines won't be getting misinformation due to communication breakdowns.
If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
BoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 5 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8808 times:
Quoting Dougloid (Reply 1): did you say December 2008? That's a year and a half from now.
Quote: Airbus aims to freeze the plane's overall shape and size in October 2008 before beginning detailed design drawings, Mr. McConnell said. Airbus is working to "take risk out of the program," he said.
The WSJ is subscription only, there's a summary of the article here:
PlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 6333 posts, RR: 28
Reply 6, posted (8 years 5 months 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 8767 times:
I had been wondering about the "US Airways April 30th" big order,which was going 350, then 787, then silent. The fact that we never heard a murmur (or at least I didn't) pretty much told me that an A350/US order might very well be announced at the airshow next month. In any event, it certainly had not been a done deal.
Next Trip: SEA-ORD-DSM on United/OMA-DEN-SEA on Southwest
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 33102 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (8 years 5 months 16 hours ago) and read 7735 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 4): The M8 "final design freeze" milestone has been October 2008 since the -XWB was first shown, back in July last year, IIRC...the things that matter get frozen progressively between now and then. M8 requires all of the major supplier contracts to be in place, and the systems defined IIRC.
Got it. So no big deal, then, and it gives Airbus time to keep tweaking.
707lvr From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 590 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (8 years 5 months 13 hours ago) and read 7262 times:
Quoting BoomBoom (Thread starter): Airbus has offered favorable terms on pricing as well as agreeing to renegotiate terms on A320s the airline ordered
Anything can happen between now and 2014 [whenever.] In the meantime, renegotiating terms on existing 320 orders sounds fantastic. Pretty much unbeatable in fact in any business. Half the U.S. carriers might not even be around in 7 more years, who knows? I imagine more than a few other airlines would be interested in this action.
N844AA From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1352 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (8 years 5 months 12 hours ago) and read 6964 times:
Quoting Scbriml (Reply 8): Boeing didn't finalise the 787's configuration until September 2005. However, that didn't stop ANA ordering it nearly 18 months before that. How is that different?
If I recall correctly, that was the stage at which the plane's final design was frozen. I'm no engineer, but in plain English that reads significantly differently from "freez[ing] the plane's overall shape and size ... before beginning detailed design drawings."
New airplanes, new employees, low fares, all touchy-feely ... all of them are losers. -Gordon Bethune
Scbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 14238 posts, RR: 45
Reply 13, posted (8 years 5 months 10 hours ago) and read 6292 times:
Quoting N844AA (Reply 12): "freez[ing] the plane's overall shape and size ... before beginning detailed design drawings."
As per Astuteman's reply:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 4): Seriously, though, the things that matter get frozen progressively between now and then.
M8 requires all of the major supplier contracts to be in place, and the systems defined IIRC.
What I'm saying is, I don't see how airlines considering and committing to the A350 now, know much less than ANA did when it placed its order for 787s.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10670 posts, RR: 97
Reply 14, posted (8 years 5 months 10 hours ago) and read 6195 times:
Quoting N844AA (Reply 12): If I recall correctly, that was the stage at which the plane's final design was frozen. I'm no engineer, but in plain English that reads significantly differently from "freez[ing] the plane's overall shape and size ... before beginning detailed design drawings."
As per my previous response, I understand the plane's overall shape and size (and specs) will be frozen this September/October (IIRC - corrections welcomed ), leaving another year to progress to "final" design freeze, by which time EVERYTHING is frozen.
Tootallsd From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 565 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 5 months 4 hours ago) and read 4471 times:
Given the competitive disadvantage vis-a-vis the 787, the long run up to a design for the A350 seems like a nightmare for their sales force. It may be according to plan, but the plan is not working in Airbus' favor.
EI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 5 months 3 hours ago) and read 4258 times:
Quoting Clickhappy (Reply 16): Quoting Scbriml (Reply 8):
Boeing didn't finalise the 787's configuration until September 2005
Amazing! So Boeing was able to do in 2.5 years (finalize design to EIS) what will take Airbus 5 years with the A350XWB, yet you find reason to brag.
I was under the impression that the A350XWB final design freeze is in 2008, wouldnt that make its design process 2 to 2.5 years? I do consider it to be a different aircraft to the old A350 (assuming thats where you arrive at a figure of 5 years), as the technical aspects of the two aircraft have little in commmon. Essentially, airbus started from scratch with the XWB, but is keeping the A380 cockpit instruments.
Logos From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 805 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (8 years 5 months 3 hours ago) and read 4013 times:
You really have to wonder if Airbus would be revenue positive on such a deal to USAirways, and it's probably impossible for them to tell right now with so much yet to be determined about the A350. As much as I'd like to see a 787 in US colors, that could be a pretty tough deal for them to resist as they get NBs that give them fleet commonality sooner than they could get them from Boeing, plus givebacks on planes they've already ordered. If the A350 project really goes south by say, 2011 and US sees it coming maybe they could get an escape clause on the A350, order the 787 and still have their widebody by 2013.
It seems like a scenario like that would be tough for US to pass up. I don't know if it makes a lot of sense for Airbus to do business this way, but they're kind of desperate right now. It's also highly unlikely they'll be allowed to fail and they know it.
Dougloid From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 5 months 3 hours ago) and read 3953 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 14): As per my previous response, I understand the plane's overall shape and size (and specs) will be frozen this September/October (IIRC - corrections welcomed ), leaving another year to progress to "final" design freeze, by which time EVERYTHING is frozen.
So what you're saying is that the envelope will be set in concrete this year and all else is TBD until 2008? That seems reasonable enough. "Design freeze" is sort of an abstract concept anyway. Large aircraft are very much an individually built and equipped thing.
I remember two MD11s that were ordered by JAT and when they were about 50 per cent complete Yugoslavia imploded into civil war. They were taken over by American Airlines who got a hell of a deal on them, and they had to be modified quite a bit for customer configuration.
Come to think of it JAT partially paid for some of their MD80s with canned hams and there was a small office that was tasked with selling or giving away the hams any way they could. I ate a couple of them myself.
However there is a long time between final design freeze and entry into service.
the $64,000 question is can Airbus afford to spot the competition that kind of temporal advantage, given that the competition shows no signs of doing a Rip Van Winkle in the product development department.
The other $64,000 question is what is going to replace the B737 and A320, and who is going to build it?
EA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2838 posts, RR: 10
Reply 22, posted (8 years 5 months 3 hours ago) and read 3836 times:
I thought that Airbus had decided on the 350XWB design that we've all been talking about since July. This seemed like monster of a plane(s). What is the problem with freezing this design?? And get rolling with it now? If only foresight was always 20/20, perhaps Airbus could have done away with the VLA market for now, and pursued the 350XWB or some plane along those lines earlier. Well since they aren't freezing any designs as of right now, perhaps they can, design a 350 model to compete with the 787-8 too. This would effectively kill the A330, but Boeing will be cannibalizing their own 772ER with the 787-10, and the 777 is a n even newer design than the 330/340. Then Airbus would really have a line that covered the 787 up to the 77W.
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.