Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will Airbus Introduce A350-700?  
User currently offlineAirbuske From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 466 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 4030 times:

Hi everyone, this is going to be my first post here on A.net so I ask all of you to please be lenient on me  Smile.

If I'm not mistaken, the A350 XWB family can serve as a potential replacement for the entire 777 and 787 family with the exception of the 788 since it seats 238 pax while the smallest A350 is the A358 which seats 270 pax (both a/c in three class configuration)

Do you all reckon Airbus will possibly eliminate a couple more frames from the A359 to create the A357 carrying about 240 pax in a three class config?

Of course, all this is assuming that the operating economics for the would be A357 would still be favorable. This would allow the A350 family to also serve as a replacement for not only the 787-8 but also the 757-300 (243 pax) & 767-400ER (245 pax) with added advantages of fleet commonality, greater range and ofcourse.. added passenger comfort! ( I mean its Airbus  Smile )

44 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9109 posts, RR: 75
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 4016 times:

Quoting Airbuske (Thread starter):
Do you all reckon Airbus will possibly eliminate a couple more frames from the A359 to create the A357 carrying about 240 pax in a three class config?

Nope...

I think the next airframe will be a 300/310/321/757 replacement....



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineOceansWorld From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3991 times:

Quoting Zeke (Reply 1):
I think the next airframe will be a 300/310/321/757 replacement....

What do you think ? Would it be part of an A320NG family, or a short fuselage widebody aircraft able to carry about 220 pax in two classes ?


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31011 posts, RR: 86
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3984 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Airbuske (Thread starter):
Do you all reckon Airbus will possibly eliminate a couple more frames from the A359 to create the A357 carrying about 240 pax in a three class config?

Highly unlikely, in that such a shrink would probably not fare well against the 787-8. While it is bigger then the 787-8, the A350-800 is not enormously so and, as such, should be able to hold it's own as an A330-200 replacement.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3409 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3961 times:

God no, the A358 is already pushing the bounds of economic uselessness. The MOST an A357 could hope for is to match the 737-600 for % of total sales. If you don't have that handy try thinking of trying very hard to stay an integer % instead of a decimal on.

User currently offlineLegoguy From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2006, 3313 posts, RR: 39
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3961 times:

Quoting Airbuske (Thread starter):
Do you all reckon Airbus will possibly eliminate a couple more frames from the A359 to create the A357 carrying about 240 pax in a three class config?

I believe the wings are more suited to the larger models of the A350XWB series. To use the wings on anything smaller than the A358 may not produce great results. Could someone back me on on this?

Welcome to a.net and nice first post!



Can you say 'Beer Can' without sounding like a Jamaican saying 'Bacon'?
User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 883 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 3946 times:

The 787-8 market is pretty much done or being done before the current A350 models get out the gate. It would serve no purpose.

Also the A350 will not be replacing the 787. They will be competing.


User currently offlineAirbuske From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 466 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3821 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
God no, the A358 is already pushing the bounds of economic uselessness.

Well the airlines certainly seem to think differently. Yesterday at Le Bourget, 20 A358's for QR and 22 for US. Yes the A359 has the largest share in % ordered, but A358 has a decent chunk as well!

Quoting Legoguy (Reply 5):
I believe the wings are more suited to the larger models of the A350XWB series. To use the wings on anything smaller than the A358 may not produce great results.

That's a good point, the A350 family was designed with common wing geometry and its highly unlikely that this wing model could be transfered to an a/c that small (in relative terms).

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 6):
The 787-8 market is pretty much done or being done before the current A350 models get out the gate.

Could you please elaborate?

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 6):
Also the A350 will not be replacing the 787. They will be competing.

Sorry about that, silly mistake that I overlooked.

Quoting Legoguy (Reply 5):
Welcome to a.net and nice first post!

Thanks for the warm welcome, I really appreciate it  Smile


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9109 posts, RR: 75
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3813 times:

Quoting OceansWorld (Reply 2):
What do you think ? Would it be part of an A320NG family, or a short fuselage widebody aircraft able to carry about 220 pax in two classes ?

I think the answer to that question lies with the engine manufacturers, nothing really about to give a NB the thrust with the fuel economy at the moment, a GEnx 2B with 55k thrust, ....ideally it would be A310/753 sized with about 3500 nm range, and 20,000 kg lighter than the 787-300 (NB the A300 is already about 10,000 kg lighter than the 783), aimed primarily at European charter or regional Asian carriers.

It would basically attack the 737-900ER from above, and 787-300/800 from below, just my opinion.....



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 852 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3791 times:

What about 787-3, what´s the pax/range in that model, and ANA (so far) the only one to order it?

Micke//  Confused



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineWAH64D From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 966 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3773 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
God no, the A358 is already pushing the bounds of economic uselessness.

42 orders in the last few days would suggest otherwise.



I AM the No-spotalotacus.
User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3768 times:

Quoting Airbuske (Thread starter):
Do you all reckon Airbus will possibly eliminate a couple more frames from the A359 to create the A357 carrying about 240 pax in a three class config?

No, not unless some government-owned airline with a political motive placed an order for 50 or so. There is no commercial reason to build such an aircraft for the reasons already stated above.


User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 883 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 7 hours ago) and read 3725 times:

Quoting Airbuske (Reply 7):

Could you please elaborate?

Sure, the basic reason behind this logic is that a lot of airlines that wanted to replace their 767's and even some of the older A330's have gone ahead and bought 787-8 models already. A 700 model A350 would be after all the ones already on the list so it would not EIS until 2016. At that point pretty much every 767 operator will need to have started replacing those planes.

The replacement cycle for the 787-8 would not really come around until 2020 or 2025 or so. At that point an A350-700 would be non-competitive with whatever replaced the 787.

This is why Airbus, as the EIS for the A350 slipped further and further back, decided to go after the 777 market instead. It will be in its replacement cycle when the A350 goes into service. The 767 will already be on the way out.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3409 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 3668 times:

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 10):
42 orders in the last few days would suggest otherwise.

Actually it doesn't.... The 737-600 sold remarkably similar numbers to start with then nada. Well ok, its sold 57 frames so the 737-600 is still ahead.

And if you care to read what I wrote its "STARTING" to push that limit. Its not at it (maybe), but removing any more length from the A350 does NOT produce a useful reduction in operating costs. I would expect the A359 will in the real world to have remarkably identical operating costs to the A358, thus making the A358 not worth buying for 95+% of the customers

History is littered with examples of a "shrink to far".


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31011 posts, RR: 86
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 3619 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 9):
What about 787-3, what´s the pax/range in that model, and ANA (so far) the only one to order it?

NH and JL both have ordered the type. It's optimized for sub-1500nm missions so it pretty much won't see service outside of Japan and perhaps China and India.


User currently offlineBrianDromey From Ireland, joined Dec 2006, 3920 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 3591 times:

Quoting Airbuske (Thread starter):

Do you all reckon Airbus will possibly eliminate a couple more frames from the A359 to create the A357 carrying about 240 pax in a three class config?

Funny you should ask this question, I was thinking of exactly the same thing last night.

I would be surprised if an A357 were to be produced. It might have been offered to airlines initially when the XWB was launched, but the cost to operate an A358 were not likely to have been that much more.

I would guess that both Boeing and Airbus will try to replace the 739/739ER, 752/753, 762, A300/A310, A321 with a member (or possibly two) of the new narrowbodies. There is definately a sizeable market for a 220+ seat narrowbody with the capibilities of the 757 and the ability to carry containeriesd cargo/baggage.

I think the next gen of narrowbody could have many members, based around two seperate platforms, with a lot of commainility in the cabin, and the flightdeck. A CFRP fuselage is likely, and a certain amount of wing/undercarriage technology will be common also.

Welcome to a.net, BTW

Brian.



Next flights: MAN-ORK-LHR(EI)-MAN(BD); MAN-LHR(BD)-ORK (EI); DUB-ZRH-LAX (LX) LAX-YYZ (AC) YYZ-YHZ-LHR(AC)-DUB(BD)
User currently offlineAvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2472 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 3510 times:

I think improved versions of the existing A330-200 might better serve this end of the market. Reengining it with the GEnx or Trent new-gen 787 powerplants wouldn't get it quite performance-competitive but considering the large installed customer base, if the price was low enough, it might keep selling for a long time. Shrinking the XWB further probably makes less sense, I suspect it would likely end up heavier, composites or no.

User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10046 posts, RR: 96
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week ago) and read 3370 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Zeke (Reply 1):
I think the next airframe will be a 300/310/321/757 replacement....

 checkmark 
Question is, will it be a narrowbody, or a new widebody based on the -XWB cross-section?

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 4):
God no, the A358 is already pushing the bounds of economic uselessness

Just like the 787-9, presumably, then, with which the A350XWB-800 is economically competitive........... Wink

FWIW, a shorter -XWB body is entirely feasible, but not as a member of the A350 family.
To do so would need:-
smaller engines (55k-60k)
smaller, and lighter wing (less than 56m span IMO)
Lighter landing gear

Thus lighter OEW
And lower MTOW.

Regards


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3409 posts, RR: 4
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week ago) and read 3326 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 17):
Just like the 787-9, presumably, then, with which the A350XWB-800 is economically competitive

Astuteman, I think Airbus knows that the A358 can't keep up with the 789 on any mission the 789 is capable of doing. They have a hard enough time keeping up with the 788 on a PER SEAT BASIS using their numbers. Even worse I think the majority of the 767 and A330 market would best be replaced by the 788, though given the improvements a A358 would still be better than the old frames on most missions.

Right now the A350 is trying to carve out a niche replacing 777 and A340NG, with a big side dish of 747 and A380 market share. The 787 at this time can't perform many of the missions that the 777LR family can, much less the other frames given the low(er) MTOW. However the A358 sits square in the middle of where the 787 is best, and brings nothing to the table but parts that are 2 sizes too big, and yet has a limited MTOW that keeps it from beating down on the 787 with shear hauling capacity. For this reason I think any sane A350 operator will take a long long look at the A358 before ordering such a subfleet.

I also think the 787-10 with a 787-9 MTOW would own the skys at the transatlantic market and other 5K nm routes. Longer routes could still be done economically without cargo if need be. More passengers than a A346 and what... 40%? less fuel burn and MX costs also about the same 40% off? Sure makes Europe from BFE USA seem a whole lot more profitable than ever before doesn't it? Course Airbus can toss cargo on the routes but for higher costs so the A350 certainly has legs in this category also.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10046 posts, RR: 96
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 1 week ago) and read 3316 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 18):
I think Airbus knows that the A358 can't keep up with the 789 on any mission the 789 is capable of doing

I don't think Airbus think anything of the sort.
I don't think anything of the sort.

You obviously do.

Don't for one second believe the A358XWB is NOT economically competitive with the 789.

Regards


User currently offlineZeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9109 posts, RR: 75
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3299 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 18):
Right now the A350 is trying to carve out a niche replacing 777 and A340NG, with a big side dish of 747 and A380 market share. The 787 at this time can't perform many of the missions that the 777LR family can, much less the other frames given the low(er) MTOW. However the A358 sits square in the middle of where the 787 is best, and brings nothing to the table but parts that are 2 sizes too big, and yet has a limited MTOW that keeps it from beating down on the 787 with shear hauling capacity. For this reason I think any sane A350 operator will take a long long look at the A358 before ordering such a subfleet.

Show us your numbers and source or shut up, i.e. show us your payload numbers for all the 787 and 350 types.... everything I have seen from manufacturers says yours speaking from the opposite end from the horses head ....

"777LR family", what family ?

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 18):

I also think the 787-10 with a 787-9 MTOW would own the skys at the transatlantic market and other 5K nm routes. Longer routes could still be done economically without cargo if need be. More passengers than a A346 and what... 40%? less fuel burn and MX costs also about the same 40% off? Sure makes Europe from BFE USA seem a whole lot more profitable than ever before doesn't it? Course Airbus can toss cargo on the routes but for higher costs so the A350 certainly has legs in this category also.

More passengers than a 346, your kidding....that means more passengers than a 773ER.... absolute rubbish...it is scratching to have more passengers than a 772ER !!!!



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineChiad From Norway, joined May 2006, 1153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3265 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 18):
Astuteman, I think Airbus knows that the A358 can't keep up with the 789 on any mission the 789 is capable of doing. They have a hard enough time keeping up with the 788 on a PER SEAT BASIS using their numbers. Even worse I think the majority of the 767 and A330 market would best be replaced by the 788, though given the improvements a A358 would still be better than the old frames on most missions.

Right now the A350 is trying to carve out a niche replacing 777 and A340NG, with a big side dish of 747 and A380 market share. The 787 at this time can't perform many of the missions that the 777LR family can, much less the other frames given the low(er) MTOW. However the A358 sits square in the middle of where the 787 is best, and brings nothing to the table but parts that are 2 sizes too big, and yet has a limited MTOW that keeps it from beating down on the 787 with shear hauling capacity. For this reason I think any sane A350 operator will take a long long look at the A358 before ordering such a subfleet.

I also think the 787-10 with a 787-9 MTOW would own the skys at the transatlantic market and other 5K nm routes. Longer routes could still be done economically without cargo if need be. More passengers than a A346 and what... 40%? less fuel burn and MX costs also about the same 40% off? Sure makes Europe from BFE USA seem a whole lot more profitable than ever before doesn't it? Course Airbus can toss cargo on the routes but for higher costs so the A350 certainly has legs in this category also.

WOW. I cannot remember from any moment in my life that I have disagreed with every sentence of someones opinion.
 Wow!
Man ... how the heck do you manage to come out with something like this?


User currently offlineZvezda From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, RR: 64
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 3246 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 17):
smaller, and lighter wing (less than 56m span IMO)

A wingspan of 52 meters would allow it to use ICAO code E gates.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 18):
I think Airbus knows that the A358 can't keep up with the 789 on any mission the 789 is capable of doing.

That is very dubious. I expect the A350-800 and 787-9 to be roughly competitive. Many sales will be determined by price.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 18):
I also think the 787-10 with a 787-9 MTOW would own the skys at the transatlantic market and other 5K nm routes. Longer routes could still be done economically without cargo if need be. More passengers than a A346 and what...

Perhaps you meant A340-500? The 787-10 will be about 7% smaller than the A340-600. Cabin floor areas in sq meters:

A340-500: 275.7
777-200: 279.0
787-10: 291.0
A340-600: 314.2
787-11X: 324.6
777-300ER: 330.4


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3409 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 22 hours ago) and read 3134 times:

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 22):
That is very dubious. I expect the A350-800 and 787-9 to be roughly competitive. Many sales will be determined by price.

Mmm, I'm not so optimistic based on what I have seen Airbus present thus far. If during development the numbers Airbus is claiming start trending the other way, Its possible I will agree with you. 5+ years is a hell of along time.... To me the recent reductions in range, apparent comparison to old Boeing MX numbers and needing to compare on a "per seat basis" with a smaller plane don't leave me with faith. The A380 also leaves me without faith. If we were talking about a A330 with new engines, or a A322... I'd have faith...

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 22):
Perhaps you meant A340-500? The 787-10 will be about 7% smaller than the A340-600. Cabin floor areas in sq meters:

Mmm, true, I was thinking too much of 9Y vs the old Airbus crosssection. Sorry bout that.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31011 posts, RR: 86
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 2968 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well the A350 just landed another shedload of orders at Paris today, though the model break-down is not yet known. As of the last batch, the A358 had 50, the A359 75, and the A3510 20, with 62 "undecided" so it looks like airlines seem to like the A358 so far...

[Edited 2007-06-20 14:16:55]

25 Post contains images EI321 : Thats a load of complete BS. I always reserve waving the BS flag for for particularly ridiculous posts, and this one has all the boxes ticked, so: Th
26 Post contains images Solnabo : IMO I don´t think Airbus will build A357, why should they? They don´t wanna follow Boeing and 783 huge disaster in sales. Micke//
27 Danny : Source?
28 Stitch : Google is your friend, sir. The data points for the length and width of the main cabins, as well as often the actual data itself, is available for th
29 Post contains images Airbuske : Thanks for answering my question before even asking . Has Airbus released the projected OEW and MTOW for the A350 family or is it still too soon?
30 Parapente : Quoting Stitch NH and JL both have ordered the type. It's optimized for sub-1500nm missions so it pretty much won't see service outside of Japan and p
31 Zeke : Those numbers and other performance specs are built into current contracts, it is not a public figure as yet. I should add, the OEW is not a contract
32 Stitch : I expect China and India would be interested in it only for domestic operations. While many like to propose the A388 just because you can stuff 800+
33 EI321 : I have not posted my feelings on the viability of the A350-700, so here they are: In a word, no, it is not worth doing without major (and expensive) c
34 BrianDromey : Seriously, what planet are you living on? You must know damn well that Airbus offered this to the airlines, and none of them were happy to choose thi
35 Columba : Have you ever made a positive statement when it comes to Airbus, I don' think I have ever seen one......... The A358 will likely the choice of many a
36 BigJKU : I think Airbus was right to aim for that sector of the market given a 2013 or later EIS. That 788 market will be well on its way to be replaced by th
37 Post contains images Astuteman : Did I say 56m? My intention was a span of 52m indeed. This would allow Cat D gate usage, of course...... (Cat E is 52m - 65m) You got where I was com
38 Airbuske : Now that's a bummer! But why all the secrecy? I was hoping to use those figures to extrapolate what the weights of the A357 would possibly be and the
39 Airbuske : And I know this is way off topic, but why are most cruise speeds for large commerical a/c around 0.85 Mach? I'm guessing its the most economical speed
40 XT6Wagon : yes I have and I'm glad you fail at reading comprehension. As thats NOT what I said. But keep thinking that.
41 Airbuske : How strict are they with the rules? Say for example a wingspan of 52.1m?
42 Stitch : Correct. Boeing planned for the Sonic Cruiser to have a Mach 0.95 or so cruising speed which would have shaved a few hours off long-haul missions. Ho
43 XT6Wagon : according to the quotes I've seen, this is not true. While the fuel burn per HOUR was higher than a 767, the overall fuel burn for the trip was state
44 Post contains images Stitch : Well these were the spitball data we were tossing around in the early days of the program, so no doubt the plane's specs evolved a bit better after 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...
Will Airbus Do A Freighter A350? posted Fri May 26 2006 20:20:16 by Keta
Will Airbus Reach 200 A350 Commitments This Week? posted Sun Dec 25 2005 05:49:07 by AC787
Airbus Fears A350 Demand Will Outstrip Supply Chai posted Tue Oct 11 2005 13:31:47 by Keesje
Where Will Airbus Build The A350? posted Fri Jul 29 2005 20:57:57 by Kaitak744
Airbus Says A350 Defined, Predicts Good Airshow posted Mon Jun 18 2007 02:49:48 by EI321
DREAMLIFTER, Airbus-BELUGA, A350 Cfrp Components posted Fri May 18 2007 22:07:18 by Aminobwana
Will Airbus Coem Back On Track After Paris? posted Thu Apr 26 2007 21:46:02 by Deaphen
A 4th A350XWB Version : A350-700 posted Sun Mar 18 2007 12:06:48 by FCKC
What Will Airbus Do With 210-250 Pax Market posted Tue Dec 12 2006 01:02:08 by T773ER
Walsh: BA To Talk To Airbus About A350 XWB posted Mon Dec 4 2006 13:29:52 by Leelaw