Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
If The A350XWB EIS Is Delayed, Is It Time For An A332update?  
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2755 posts, RR: 4
Posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9823 times:

According to ATWOnline, the A350XWB might have an EIS as late as 2014. That is 7 years away from now. I have no doubt that when the A350XWB jet arrives it will be a very competitive airplane for many years to come. However that is still 7 years away. And the A350XWB has grown so much that it is now not an A330 replacement, but an A340-500 and A340-600 replacement airplane. This makes a gap in the Airbus product portfolio. As the A350 has evolved, they have made an airplane that will not replace the A332. In it's product portfolio, Airbus also lacks a true 787-3/8 competitor.

The A332 is still selling well. It is a very modern plane with only 9 years in service. In the beginning the A350 should have replaced the A332. Now that it has not, but will replace the A340-500/600 should Airbus make a midlife update on the A332? Airbus are stretched on resources for the moment, but an engine update should make the A332 more competitive. With GEnx engines the A330 should be able to take some of the market share in this segment. Maybe they could co-develop an A330 update with one of the engine OEM's and use the engine OEM resources since airbus resources are so stretched at the moment?

Airbus has not said anything publicly about this segment, or how they will address the issue. This gives me the impression that Airbus in the end will just continue to sell the A330 as it is until there is no longer a demand. But with the late EIS of the A350, there should be a room for an A330-200 update.


Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
83 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKhenleyDIA From Sweden, joined Feb 2005, 427 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 9759 times:

Some might say this is a duplicate topic since someone already mentioned the article, but I think you bring up some different questions.

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
That is 7 years away from now. I have no doubt that when the A350XWB jet arrives it will be a very competitive airplane for many years to come. However that is still 7 years away. And the A350XWB has grown so much that it is now not an A330 replacement, but an A340-500 and A340-600 replacement airplane.

I partly think that you answer your own questions though. As you point out, IF the EIS for the A350XWB is delayed, then it will be 7 years. Depending on the replacement cycle for planes, Airbus will likely be better off putting the 777 more in their sites then the 787. You also point out that the A330 is still selling well. What isn't is the A340 series, because of the 777. So, again, I think Airbus is making the right move in targeting the 777 mainly. Now if only their marketing people could admit that.  Smile

Good questions, at least I think so. I am not an armchair ceo for an airliner or for the manufacturers, so I could be completely wrong with my thoughts or answers. But hey, that is why we all like this site. We get to give our opinions!

KhenleyDIA



Why sit at home and do nothing when you can travel the world.
User currently offlineSemobeila From Austria, joined Jun 2006, 73 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9719 times:

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
According to ATWOnline, the A350XWB might have an EIS as late as 2014. That is 7 years away from now.

Sorry, but that is not really new - the date of 2013/2014 has always been mentioned by Airbus for the XWB. So where is there a delay?


User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2972 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9701 times:

A mid-life update for the entire A330 program with improved engines might be a good idea, but the next generation of engines in the size range designed to be bleedless specifically for the 787, can the A330 be significantly re-engineered in-time before the 787 just romps home with the market. I know Leahy claims that the market size for such aircraft is 5000 frames over the next two decades, but a seven year lead time will surrender not just the 10% Airbus already has lost (by their own reckoning) but an additional 20-30 per cent!


A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2755 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9638 times:

Quoting KhenleyDIA (Reply 1):
Some might say this is a duplicate topic since someone already mentioned the article, but I think you bring up some different questions.

Thank you for bringing this up KhenleyDIA. I hope the moderators do not see this as a duplicate thread. The other thread is discussing if it is a good thing that Airbus now probably will opt for composite barrel, while my thread looks into the A330 and that Airbus no longer has a good replacement airplane in this segment.

Quoting KhenleyDIA (Reply 1):
Depending on the replacement cycle for planes, Airbus will likely be better off putting the 777 more in their sites then the 787.

Probably, but as has Cricket says:

Quoting Cricket (Reply 3):
I know Leahy claims that the market size for such aircraft is 5000 frames over the next two decades

Boeing has secured 10% of the 787 market for the next 20 years. Could Airbus update the A330 just a little bit to get a larger market share.

Quoting KhenleyDIA (Reply 1):
Now if only their marketing people could admit that.

 checkmark 

Quoting Semobeila (Reply 2):
Sorry, but that is not really new - the date of 2013/2014 has always been mentioned by Airbus for the XWB. So where is there a delay?

The EIS for the A350-900 has been targeted for 2013. According to ATWonline Airbus will go for a composite barrel instead of a more traditional aluminium frame. This will push the A350 EIS to early 2014.

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=9009



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineWorkhorse From France, joined Jul 2005, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9614 times:

I would go even further and say that they should cancel the entire A350 program, and make an A330 update instead. Then all available resources must be put on the A320 replacement program.

As it goes now, by the time when Boeing will be working on the 737RS, Airbus will have most of their engineering and financial resources engaged in the A350 program.

An A320 update will be less competitive then the all-new 737RS, and don't forget about Embraer! I'm ready to bet that they will make a 737/320-sized plane very soon, so Airbus will have to compete with both Boeing and Embraer, just like McDonnel-Douglas had to compete with both A and B.

By the time Airbus will finish their work on the A350, their positions will be seriously weakened on their key narrowbody market where they have done most of their money and where they were the best. Meanwhile, Boeing will have finished their work on the 737RS and will have their hands free for the Y3.

So the so much dreamed about A350, for which so much sacrifices will have been made, will in the end have quite a short life.

[Edited 2007-05-26 12:24:38]

User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9527 times:

Quoting Cricket (Reply 3):
I know Leahy claims that the market size for such aircraft is 5000 frames over the next two decades, but a seven year lead time will surrender not just the 10% Airbus already has lost (by their own reckoning) but an additional 20-30 per cent!

Both manufacturers like to present themselves as if they are at the centre of all things and trigger a world wide fleet renewal, backing up their claims by pointing at their great sales numbers (the leading product in its class, best selling aircraft in its class ever, 500 planes sold before EIS etc. etc), yet they conveniently forget that aircraft sales have steadily risen over the past few decades and that as such all of their sales numbers are subject to tempering and just proof of a CONTINUOUS and STEADILY GROWING stream of orders of which they just happen to take (a large) part because they happen to offer a good product at the time the orders were placed: a manufacturer which comes to the scene later is likely to have a better product at that time and will simply win more of its orders later and these are not to be considered less of the total, just part of another time period; it is as simple as that.

In essence: (the numbers may be wrong, they are just here as an exemple)
the 787 is competing for around 5,000 sales over the next 20 years
the A350 will compete for 5000 (or more by then) sales over its 20-years life span as well
HOWEVER, the 2 20-year time periods will not completely overlap, so the initial years (and their sales) are not lost for the A350, they are simply added at the end.

[Edited 2007-05-26 12:44:58]

User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2755 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9511 times:

Quoting Workhorse (Reply 5):
So the so much dreamed about A350, for which so much sacrifices will have been made, will in the end have quite a short life.

I agree. Airbus is sacrificing allot to make the A350 competitive. While the A350EIS is 7 years away, Boeing's development time is 4 years. Meaning that after the 787 EIS, Boeing could at best be eight years away from developing both a 737 replacement and a 777 replacement. By 2016 two years after Airbus are finished with their A350XWB Boeing could have the hole range from 100 - 400 seat covered by new carbon fiber airplanes. The oldest of them could then be the 787. Should be tempting for Boeing. While Airbus at best can do one new project, and update two others.

If one look at it this way, Airbus should consider their option very carefully. They will influence the whole future of the company.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineCricket From India, joined Aug 2005, 2972 posts, RR: 7
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 9481 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
HOWEVER, the 2 20-year time periods will not completely overlap, so the initial years (and their sales) are not lost for the A350, they are simply added at the end.

But that depends if Boeing (by 2025-30) has a successor planned for the 787, which could eat into mid-life A350 sales. Airbus did not have a a very competitive product for the second wave of 777's and see what happened - the 777-300ER stomped the competition.



A300B2/B4/6R, A313, A319/320/321, A333, A343, A388, 737-2/3/4/7/8/9, 747-3/4, 772/2E/2L/3, E170/190, F70, CR2/7, 146-3,
User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7717 posts, RR: 8
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9416 times:

We need to understand the difference in mentality of a company who can secure financial backing from a "government entity" rather than private sources. Airbus resources are limited only by the political will of their most important share holders, so with that, the focus within the company is not on whether they can "afford" to produce a B-787 competitor by improving the A-332 while at the same time bring the A-380 into the market and producing a A-320 replacememt.
I do believe that presently, they are looking at how best to improve the product lines, presently, the weak link in their line up is the A-340, you do not hear the route / payload / range specific details being given for the rest of their products when comparing them to Boeing, the A-320 and A-332 stands toe to toe without much if any interpretation.

The A-350XWB is going to fill the obvious weak link - A-340/500/600 -, the decision on whether to improve the A-332 or build a new a/c will be based more on Airbus plans to produce a technically competitive or better plane and a lot less on the extent of their resources being stretched, my opinion. Whether liked or not, Airbus is more than just a plane maker, so other factors than just pure economics play a much larger part, my opinion.


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9416 times:

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 7):
By 2016 two years after Airbus are finished with their A350XWB Boeing could have the hole range from 100 - 400 seat covered by new carbon fiber airplanes

And then they can enjoy a few years of lead, after which they will be matched by Airbus on all of their offerings by a product which is newer and likely better; a bit in the same way as they were roughly 15 years ago... I don't know if that is such a tempting idea to Boeing really.

Remember that the bottom line is Airbus currently has the technologically most advanced product line up flying (A320/A330/A380) and has enough backlog on them to let Boeing take the first steps on ALL of the market segments with enough time at hands to let them take a 5 year lead on them...

That's why I've never understood why Airbus was so eager to react to the 787. They should have just sticked to their initial position towards the 787 ('its just a plastic A330') and kept on selling their A330 as it is. Just look at the sales figures of the plane over the past few years and imagine what they might have been if some of the A350 customers would also have selected it iso the original A350 (which I wouldn't have offered). They were in NO urgent need to do move to protect their production over the next years whatsoever.

Then at around this time, they could have come out with a fresh and all new design, called the A350, which would be a full 777 competitor, based on all the 787 technology and putting Boeing under pressure of having to focus on 2 next projects at the same time: Y1 and Y3.

Airbus is currently shifting to the above strategy so it seems, by making the A350 a full 777 competitor and adopting all possible new technologies... In my view, they have understood they were needlessly worried by the 787 and are happily handing over the initiative to Boeing.


User currently offlineOyKIE From Norway, joined Jan 2006, 2755 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9297 times:

Quoting Par13del (Reply 9):
Airbus resources are limited only by the political will of their most important share holders, so with that, the focus within the company is not on whether they can "afford" to produce a B-787 competitor by improving the A-332 while at the same time bring the A-380 into the market and producing a A-320 replacement.

Airbus has it's human resources stretched. That means that they cannot get hold of enough engineers, to launch more programs. As of this date, I am not sure how many engineers that are working on the A400M and A380, but i doubt there would be enough engineers to help Airbus launch more programs.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
And then they can enjoy a few years of lead, after which they will be matched by Airbus on all of their offerings

That is true, but then Airbus needs to cut down the development time. Why do they need 7 years from now until EIS? The 787 got developed in 4 years.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
That's why I've never understood why Airbus was so eager to react to the 787.

Me neither. They should have waited until they knew what they where facing.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
In my view, they have understood they were needlessly worried by the 787 and are happily handing over the initiative to Boeing.

Airbus is more on track with their A350 right now, as it will enter service when the 777 is due for replacement. Bur if Airbus has their hands tied the next 7 years, that could end up making Airbus less competitive.



Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 9273 times:

Quoting Workhorse (Reply 5):
As it goes now, by the time when Boeing will be working on the 737RS...

What do you mean will be? This thing is already in the pipeline....


User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7717 posts, RR: 8
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9246 times:

Slz396 I think the reaction of the market leader in any industry is more of a not sit on your laurels and wait, but to do what is necessary to remain on top, however, they can be forgiven for at times not remembering that they are the market leaders, a slip every now and then is ok, just not a big one.

Cheers


User currently offlineZSOFN From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 1413 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9184 times:

Quoting Workhorse (Reply 5):
I would go even further and say that they should cancel the entire A350 program, and make an A330 update instead.

That's what the A350 in its original form was meant to be - there's a reason it's no longer the case; it's not what the customers wanted.


User currently offlineRheinbote From Germany, joined May 2006, 1968 posts, RR: 52
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9153 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
...putting Boeing under pressure of having to focus on 2 next projects at the same time: Y1 and Y3.
Airbus is currently shifting to the above strategy so it seems, by making the A350 a full 777 competitor and adopting all possible new technologies... In my view, they have understood they were needlessly worried by the 787 and are happily handing over the initiative to Boeing.

What...? Airbus is not in the position to force Boeing to anything due to a) a perilious lack of cash and b) a worrysome disadvantage in product time-to-market. So unless Airbus manages to revamp their corporate structure and their industrial set-up and find their own profitable pace, they'll never accumulate the capital nor achieve the agility required to effectively mess with Boeing, let alone on two fronts, unless Boeing stumbles over their own feet.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
Remember that the bottom line is Airbus currently has the technologically most advanced product line up flying

Even if that was true, that wouldn't be worth a damn if the product line is not profitable. For the time being, the A380 is eating up all the profits generated by the 320 and 330. In this context, it is my impression that one issue seems to be largely ignored: The complete failure of the A340-500/-600 program ceding cumulative revenues of USD ~180bn to the 777 until 2016.

edited for wrong quote

[Edited 2007-05-26 14:36:45]

User currently offlineNorCal From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2459 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 9135 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
That's why I've never understood why Airbus was so eager to react to the 787.

Maybe because the 787 size represents the largest portion of the widebody market. Doing nothing is a very dangerous proposition.

Doing what they have done is better than what you have suggested. Airbus has been keeping customers waiting by saying they have this great new A350. Even though the EIS has been pushed back further and further with countless design changes the airlines have still waited. Airlines don't like the prospect of only having one choice and because of this some with out a burning need to replace fleets have decided to wait. If Airbus had done nothing for several years what do you think those airlines would have done? They would have seen the rush for 787s and jumped on the band wagon to get spots before they are all gone. At least with the path Airbus has taken they have been able to keep some airlines sitting on the fence. Airlines like QR and EK would have bought 787s by now if there was no prospect of an A350

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
Just look at the sales figures of the plane over the past few years and imagine what they might have been if some of the A350 customers would also have selected it iso the original A350 (which I wouldn't have offered). They were in NO urgent need to do move to protect their production over the next years whatsoever.

While the A330 is a magnificent plane some of the sales have been top off orders, compensation deals (for the A380), and stop gap airplanes. The A330 will slow down as its own production slots are quickly filling up. Boeing sold quite a few 737 classics (MD sold some MD-80s as well) because Airbus couldn't fill the demand for A320s but the demand for the classics didn't mean a 737NG wasn't needed.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
In my view, they have understood they were needlessly worried by the 787 and are happily handing over the initiative to Boeing.

That is the same hubris that got Boeing into trouble.....

Quoting Par13del (Reply 13):
Slz396 I think the reaction of the market leader in any industry is more of a not sit on your laurels and wait, but to do what is necessary to remain on top, however, they can be forgiven for at times not remembering that they are the market leaders, a slip every now and then is ok, just not a big one.

Exactly


User currently offlineAirbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8663 posts, RR: 10
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9048 times:

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
But with the late EIS of the A350, there should be a room for an A330-200 update.

At this time all we can be sure of is, we don't know what Airbus is doing. From the day Airbus launched the A350 I suggested it was just a delay tactic to give them some room to work on a true new aircraft. Not only a new aircraft but one that would straddle both the 787 and 777 models. When I made that comment, I admit it sounded a little ludicrous but today it's ringging more true than ever. Some people said they could never do that because their customers would never sign up for one airplane and then accept a completely different airplane. Well, it happened. At this time, I'm not sure I can trust anything coming out of Airbus anymore regarding the A350 program. For all I know they could very well be saying one thing, and working on something completely different just to throw off the competition. There's still nothing concrete about the XWB other than facy drawings. You don't just wake up one day and decide to change from panels to barrels. Something is up and I suspect the final airplane and EIS date will be different than what we know today.


User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 883 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9034 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
In essence: (the numbers may be wrong, they are just here as an exemple)
the 787 is competing for around 5,000 sales over the next 20 years
the A350 will compete for 5000 (or more by then) sales over its 20-years life span as well
HOWEVER, the 2 20-year time periods will not completely overlap, so the initial years (and their sales) are not lost for the A350, they are simply added at the end.

Unless of course the A350 does not offer substantially better economics than the 787, in which case the life of the 787 will be extended.

The 20 year lifespan of a frame is a general guideline, but if no one makes anything that can clearly beat it then that cycle can be extended.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 10):
Airbus is currently shifting to the above strategy so it seems, by making the A350 a full 777 competitor and adopting all possible new technologies... In my view, they have understood they were needlessly worried by the 787 and are happily handing over the initiative to Boeing.

This view is just delusional in my opinion. Airbus faces a serious development problem that no one wants to face and it has killed companies before. Essentially they have a competitor that has developed a new, game changing product first and that competitor is inside of their development cycle. That is not a recipe for success and should not be celebrated.

Airbus faces 2 major problems that they have to address and both are related to their inability to develop products in a timely manner.

Being 7-10 years behind, who knows know that the a350 may be pushed back, is just not going to cut it. By having such slow development cycles the A350 is going to come out either facing competition from upgraded 787's at that point or a whole new larger design or possibly both. From design freeze to first delivery is currently longer than Boeing's total development time and that just lets Boeing see the specs and aim directly to beat it. This is a very bad thing.

The second major problem is that Airbus simply cannot be late to the narrow body market. While it is nice in theory to say they can watch and then just build something better it is not quite that simple. Margins are not nearly as great when it comes to performance on narrow body aircraft. Waiting 5 years will do little but have them be late to the party. If they wanted to be vastly more efficient that would mean new engines compared to Boeing, so that would be around 10 years and they would just face an updated version of Boeing's new plane were that the case.

We have seen, particularly in the narrow body market that a lot of emphasis is put on fleet commonality. If Boeing starts grabbing up A320 customers because Airbus is late to the party then Airbus has to overcome that as well. While Boeing cannot fill all the demand at once they can certainly make it so they get in the door with a lot of people.

In the narrow body LCC market in particular none of those carriers can really afford to be caught with less efficient aircraft while other LCC's and many legacies are able to undercut them on price.

Airbus cannot afford to do two things.

First they cannot be late to the narrow body party. That will kill them as I think it is pretty unlikely that they could substantially beat a new narrow body by Boeing in a way that is not simply matched, like an engine upgrade. (nor do I think Boeing could substantially beat Airbus for that matter)

Secondly they cannot continue to have these absurd development cycles. It simply will not be possible to stay competitive with that sort of turnaround time.


User currently offlineWorkhorse From France, joined Jul 2005, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9017 times:

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 11):

Airbus has it's human resources stretched.

Exactly. Human resources, logistics, manufacturing process... even if the government gives you freely tons of cash (which will not happen) it takes more then just money to achieve an industrial project. I don't think Airbus will be able to make A350 and a competitive A320 replacement at the same time.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 12):
What do you mean will be? This thing is already in the pipeline....

Sure, but most BCA resources are now focused on the 787. The 737RS project will really take of in 1-2 years, I think.

Quoting ZSOFN (Reply 14):
That's what the A350 in its original form was meant to be - there's a reason it's no longer the case; it's not what the customers wanted.

Excuse me for being cynical, but they would have no choice. An updated A330 with GEnx/Trent 1000's would not be that bad. Airlines would have choice between the 787 (which would be more expensive and offer later delivery dates due to its popularity) and a cheap and quickly delivered A330NG.

This would not bring Airbus a lot of money or glory, but it would keep the line open until some next important widebody project is launched.

[Edited 2007-05-26 15:26:03]

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31437 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 9017 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OyKIE (Thread starter):
The A332 is still selling well. It is a very modern plane with only 9 years in service. In the beginning the A350 should have replaced the A332. Now that it has not, but will replace the A340-500/600 should Airbus make a midlife update on the A332?

I used to think an A330E program was a good idea, but now I do not. I went into it more in depth in the other thread, but the main reason is this:

Airlines believe spun CFRP monolithic barrels are the future. That an A330E would be an Al or Al-Li plane means that it will not appeal to airlines once the 787 enters service and proves herself. The airlines have already shown this by their refusal to commit to the A350 en masse and forcing Airbus to now use the same spun CFRP monolithic barrels on the A350 that Boeing is using on the 787.

I just can't see any large investment Airbus does with the A330 family making it any more competitive in the long term compared to the 787 or the A350. The A330 is selling now because she is a good plane for the moment and she is available, but her time - and the time of all Al airliners - will soon be past.


User currently offlineBringiton From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 866 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 8994 times:

Airbus has sold the A330 till something like 2009 , i am sure that instead of spending 2-4 billion dollars in making a NG version they can discount (post 2009) with half of that money and sell the produciton line for another 5 years or so . If the demand continues like this the 787 (even with increased production) would not be able to tackle all of the demand till 2015 or so , so airbus can still technically sell quite a few a330's on an interim basis . No need to spend the money now to make A little better (still wont come close to the 787) , they are bettre off exploiting the shortage (if the buying cycle continues post 2010) in boeing's ability to deliver to all the demand and keep selling the existing 330's , They are probably selling for premium now because they are in big demand but post 2010 they can discount them and still make quite a bit of money through volume .

We would have to wait and see , maybe at farnborough next year airbus decides to add some more stuff and the EIS gets delayed by another year  Smile  Wink


User currently offlineWorkhorse From France, joined Jul 2005, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 8988 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 20):
I used to think an A330E program was a good idea, but now I do not.

Do they really have choice? My opinion is that they can afford to loose the widebody market (or, more likely, an important part of the widebody market), but they can't afford to loose the narrowbody market. If Boeing and Embraer bring to market their all-new 737/320 replacement products both at the same time, Airbus is dead.

[Edited 2007-05-26 15:37:16]

User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 883 posts, RR: 11
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 8936 times:

Quoting Workhorse (Reply 19):
Airlines would have choice between the 787 (which would be more expensive and offer later delivery dates due to its popularity) and a cheap and quickly delivered A330NG.

I am not sure a 330NG would be any much substantially cheaper than a 787. The 787 manufacturing process is probably substantially cheaper than that for the 330NG so I would imagine Boeing could get the price pretty comparable to any 300NG.


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 37
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 8920 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 6):
In essence: (the numbers may be wrong, they are just here as an exemple)
the 787 is competing for around 5,000 sales over the next 20 years
the A350 will compete for 5000 (or more by then) sales over its 20-years life span as well
HOWEVER, the 2 20-year time periods will not completely overlap, so the initial years (and their sales) are not lost for the A350, they are simply added at the end.

A given model has only a 10 year lifetime at most, unless updates are made or the competition doesn't push the boundaries of technology far enough. Had Boeing pushed the 737NG tech further, the A320 would have needed a serious upgrade to keep up. As Boeing was conservative, they are basically at parity. If Airbus can't get a tech advantage over the current 787 models, which Boeing can't match through minor updates, the lifetime of the current 787 models will END AT THE SAME TIME as the competing A350XWB models.

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 15):
Even if that was true, that wouldn't be worth a damn if the product line is not profitable. For the time being, the A380 is eating up all the profits generated by the 320 and 330. In this context, it is my impression that one issue seems to be largely ignored: The complete failure of the A340-500/-600 program ceding cumulative revenues of USD ~180bn to the 777 until 2016.

I have noted that people seem to forget about the complete disaster of the A340NG and focus on the A380. The A340NG was an expensive update that has collapsed saleswise and is not generating profits that Airbus has hoped for. This is offseted to some extent by the fact that they are able to sell more A330s to the extent that there is competition between models for manufacturing assets and positions. And while these might be fairly profitable as development costs are probably paid off, they won't generate the same magnitude of profits as a larger plane. Particularly when the 787 limits the pricing ability of Airbus.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
25 Stitch : If the current A330 figuratively "won't sell" after the mid-2010's because it's not CFRP, why would an A330E that also was not CFRP sell? One of the
26 SLCPilot : Well, given the growth and the delays in the A350XWB, it is positioning itself nicely to be a Y3 replacement aircraft. One can only assume Airbus has
27 Slz396 : Just to point out this is precisely how Airbus did did it in the past too, despite them having longer design cycles and being lower on cash than Boei
28 Post contains images Astuteman : We need to have a bit of care throwing this number around. The 787 has clearly benefitted in the early stages of its industrialisation from the work
29 Stitch : Yes but Airbus was competing with Boeing designs that had been in service for decades and based on what are now considered "traditional" production m
30 Ken777 : Their main problem appears to be the lack of technology for making the barrels. A while back Airbus announced that they were spending half a billion
31 Astuteman : At the same time, Boeing themselves have said that such a lead is not huge enough to be worth doing until the engines come along......... Regards
32 Post contains images SEPilot : I question that the 787 would be more expensive; my understanding is that it can be built for less than a comparable Al airliner due to much less lab
33 Sv11 : I think once the 787 enters service, Airbus will be struggling on the widebody front for a few years. The 77W has pretty much outclassed the A340 toda
34 SEPilot : Quite true; the best hope for Airbus is that the A350 will similarly outclass the 777. But they need to get their act together and get the A350 in th
35 Poitin : Clearly, if the A350XWB is now a composite barrel construction, then Airbus will certainly have to announce it at the Paris Airshow, along with a EIS
36 DfwRevolution : And what about paying those past investments that have already been sunk? Will Airbus just default on those? With the current A380 backlog, Airbus wi
37 Bringiton : That is an excellent point and one which doesnt get raised too often . We often talk about technology , and what "they have" and what " they need to
38 Wingman : I think the long term risk to Airbus was best said in the original ATO article citing anonymous sources from within Airbus that their main concern abo
39 Poitin : The A330E would not win new customers, that much is clear, but there are lots of A330 operators for whom a A330E would be an attractive choice. They
40 Stitch : And the same will happen to the 777 when the A350 enters service. Frankly, an A330E makes about as much sense to me as a 777E does. The billions of d
41 Bringiton : Lets wait and see. The way the situation is currently the 777 is in great demand , and i bet because of the availability boeing is commanding a good
42 Post contains images OyKIE : I agree. Airbus is practically giving away the 787-8 spot in the market, which seems to be the largest market for widebodies at the moment. Very well
43 Post contains links Jdevora : The 330-200F was once shown as a good moment for introduce a GEnx engine for the A330 (the 748's bleed version) but the lasted that I heard about it
44 TaromA380 : First of all, is the A350XWB REALLY delayed, after the complete composite barrel switch rumor ?
45 Stitch : Well they won't have a true 787-8 competitor and that is only in terms of not being able to offer so low a capacity. Based on Airbus' goals, the A350
46 Poitin : It is a pity for there is much to be said for the GEnx on the A330 airframe. Unfortunately you are probably correct, much like they had to be REALLY
47 BigJKU : To compare the past to the present it to simply ignore reality. Airbus took on a fragmented market where a lot of airplane manufactures were struggli
48 Poitin : Once upon a time, Airbus was the fast moving innovative wiz-kid. Then came EADS. Is there a message there? Airbus needs to be set free of all the pol
49 OyKIE : That is true, but neither has Airbus between the A321 and A332. {Checkmark} Amen to that
50 Post contains images OyKIE : That is true, but neither has Airbus between the A321 and A332. Amen to that
51 Beaucaire : This whole thread is useless,since Airbus have not announced any delay tied to the use of barrels ! It is wishful thinking for some who would love to
52 Post contains images Brendows : But at the same time, they haven't announced that they will go for the barrel approach, yet That EIS for the A350 will be pushed out to at least 2014
53 BigJKU : I do not know that they were fast moving as much as other manufactures were not responding and upgrading their product lines. Not responding to the A
54 Post contains links OyKIE : Geoffrey Thomas quoted Airbus insiders who said that the latest revision will push the A350's entry into service to at least 2014, but that.. http://
55 Post contains images Keesje : time for a little reality: - the first A350 the -900 is aimed at the 777-200, "787-10" market. - the first bigger 787, the -9 will enter service from
56 DfwRevolution : Regardless of when the A350 enters service, airlines do not want an improved A330. The performance gained from just the new engines isn't sufficient
57 DfwRevolution : Funny how each time Boeing sells out two years of production slots, Airbus pushes the A350 EIS back two more years. Who remembers when the A350 would
58 Art : If The A350XWB EIS Is Delayed, Is It Time For An A332update? I have no idea now. Looking at the incremental Airbus offerings from A350 Mk1 onwards up
59 OyKIE : You bring up some valid points in regard of the A330E and the A350 Mk1. IMO had Airbus been more firm about their A330E or A350Mk1 they would have ma
60 Post contains links Aminobwana : ATW states that it will be later than 2014" (see below). http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=9009 2015 could be realistic, if all goes w
61 Astuteman : I, for one, totally agree with this comment, and now, more than ever. " target=_blank>http://www.atwonline.com/news/story....=9009 This article seems
62 Post contains images Bringiton : I think this is a A.net myth , with the type of demand there is for the jets like 330 and 777 , with them having sold out production for years ahead
63 Atmx2000 : Unless Boeing increases production rates, in which case many airlines who bought late A330s might be kicking themselves (unless Airbus guarantees res
64 Post contains images Astuteman : Without actually having any knowledge of Boeing's intent, FWIW this scenario gets my vote as the most likely. "Stretched" 787 variants will, of cours
65 Bringiton : Boeing wont really need much extra from the engine providers (over and above what they all ready cannot offer in those time frames ie. 2013-2015) for
66 Stitch : Considering how strong the margins evidently are even with discounts in the mid-40% range (based on both Boeing's and Airbus' annual reports), even i
67 Post contains images SEPilot : I totally agree with this assessment. I also agree with your earlier statement that any money spent on upgrading the A330 is wasted, and should be us
68 Aminobwana : * 1) At this stage, which is less advanced as before, where many called it a paper Aircraft, I cannot see why the final result would be better or wor
69 Stitch : Building an enhanced or even a new wing for the HGW 787 variants would be significantly cheaper then what an all new program (Y3) would cost. And a 7
70 Post contains links Poitin : Come 2010, Airbus may well wish they invested in a A330E interim for the A350. There is only so much money you can shove at a project to get it done.
71 Astuteman : Why is this relevant? Manpower is almost guaranteed NOT to be the reason the A350 will EIS in 2013 or later. The speed of mobilising the industrial i
72 Ken777 : I'm in full agreement with you on this - it would be a disaster if Airbus only focused on the 350 for the composite barrel. they know that Y1 is goin
73 Poitin : Tell us about your experiences with the Astute? It seems to be a similar situating where management got in the way repeatedly. There are only so many
74 Art : To me this approach made sense 3 or 4 years ago. Seems it did not make sense to Airbus. If you are right, then Airbus would must surely embrace the c
75 Atmx2000 : In all likely hood initial production of the successor will overlap with that of the current generation narrowbody. The production rate of the new mo
76 Aminobwana : The Greek mathematician Anaxagoras agrees with you !! "As caused by for many managers": this is also a fact, in view of the duplicate and competing f
77 Post contains images SEPilot : How true; one of the most insightful statements I have seen on A-net. I recall an assessment of education in the US that determined that the best ind
78 Stitch : The Asian market did show interest in a larger VLA then the 744, which is why Boeing started work on the 747-500 and 747-600 programs. However, the o
79 Post contains links and images Keesje : despite being a design from the early nineties and airbus first truly long haul aircraft the a330 still has superior casm to existing and newer aircra
80 SEPilot : But not enough of them were interested to make it worthwhile; which is why Boeing announced at about the same time that they would not be making a co
81 Stitch : Worthwhile for two all-new $15 billion programs, yes, but if Boeing truly felt the 450+ seat market was a complete and total non-starter, they would
82 Poitin : The question is not if Boeing can assemble more 787's -- they can -- but if they can get the parts. My guess is yes, but starting in 2012 or so. I th
83 Post contains images SEPilot : Quite true. Note that Boeing explored, but did NOT launch, the stretch programs for the 747 until they had substantially more efficient engines. As i
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...
Alaska - Time For An Image Re-do? posted Fri Sep 2 2005 01:28:15 by Dolphinflyer
Time For An Indian Air Passengers' Association? posted Wed Dec 29 2004 03:23:09 by Dulleswatcher
Terminal A @MCO: Time For An Upgrade? posted Sun Mar 14 2004 06:24:43 by PanAm330
SAA Fuselage Livery Design. Time For An Upgrade? posted Fri Oct 18 2002 09:29:01 by AirOrange
Working Part-time For An Airline posted Thu May 3 2001 02:59:07 by Gocaps16
Time For An AI Decision? posted Wed Dec 27 2000 23:24:48 by Singapore_Air
Time It Takes To Pay For An Airliner.... posted Mon Oct 9 2006 00:22:39 by Boeing nut
What Is The Highest Total Time For Any Pilot? posted Mon Oct 17 2005 16:53:16 by KDTWFlyer
The Best Location For An Airport posted Wed Nov 5 2003 03:50:54 by Kevin
What's The Longest Flying Time For.... posted Sat May 17 2003 03:42:56 by Chrisj