Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Will The A350 Be Introduced Early?  
User currently offlineB777A340Fan From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 753 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10695 times:

With the recent rollout of the 787 by Boeing, I was wondering if Airbus had the means to try to get the A350 out before schedule, ultimately to be more competitive with the 787. 2012 is still waaaay out and Boeing may be even further ahead once the A350 is introduced. What do ya'll think?

187 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29655 posts, RR: 84
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10686 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

If Airbus can do so, I expect them to do so.

User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10685 times:

As things stand, there is no indication that the A350 will enter service before its current date of 2013.

User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3364 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10638 times:

It's a shame that it won't be early but that'd be somewhat unlikly - what large industrial programme ever is?

User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6725 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10479 times:

Why, what reason exist for this to happen? How many customers of the initial version of the A350 switched to the B-787? Airbus is looking to produce a better a/c than the B-787, their customers have already shown them that they will wait for their product, so Airbus has the time leverage to see how the B-787 performs and improve the A350 to be a much better product. The a.net wisdom already has it that the A350 will make the B-777 obsolete, so how much damage will the A350 do to a B-787 that is already 5-6 years old when the A350 goes into service?

The A380 is presently Airbus big show, going into service later this year, let see how that goes first then move on to the A350.


User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3364 posts, RR: 9
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10455 times:

Quoting Par13del (Reply 5):
Why, what reason exist for this to happen?

That most of us on A net will be really bored waiting another 6 years for this baby to EIS  Big grin


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 10440 times:

VERY good question, B777A340Fan!

On the face of it it's difficult to see why six years is required to develop the A350. Boeing issued 'authority to offer' the 787 in late 2003, and (barring glitches) they show every sign of achieving their aim of getting it into service by mid-2008 - i.e. in less than five years. That's notwithstanding the advanced technologies they had to develop and the unique manufacturing network they had to build. On the face of it the A350 will be a more conventional design, a lot more of the manufacturing will be 'in-house,' and they've already had a lot of time to carry out preliminary design work.

And in commercial terms the obvious thing to do is to 'fast-track' it. Aiming for 2013 doesn't just allow a lot of time for the 787 horse to gallop out of sight; it ALSO gives Boeing a lot of time to upgrade the 777 to keep it as competitive as possible.

[Edited 2007-07-10 16:08:27]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineVirginFlyer From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 4537 posts, RR: 42
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10293 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7):
On the face of it it's difficult to see why six years is required to develop the A350

A couple of thoughts - one, they may not be able to get the wheels turning properly until the Power 8 reforms are implemented... Also, perhaps the length of the development time indicates that the A350 won't be the only project under active development at Airbus around the turn of the decade - maybe they are conserving resources to be able to get work going on the new short range aircraft at the same time?

V/F



"So powerful is the light of unity that it can illuminate the whole earth." - Bahá'u'lláh
User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10275 times:

Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 4):
what large industrial programme ever is?

Terminal 5 at LHR?


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10275 times:

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 9):
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 7):
On the face of it it's difficult to see why six years is required to develop the A350

A couple of thoughts - one, they may not be able to get the wheels turning properly until the Power 8 reforms are implemented... Also, perhaps the length of the development time indicates that the A350 won't be the only project under active development at Airbus around the turn of the decade - maybe they are conserving resources to be able to get work going on the new short range aircraft at the same time?

Possibly.

All in all, airbus are going to be quite Conservative with their development timeframe projections for the foreseeable future after the A380 delays.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6673 posts, RR: 46
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10234 times:

Quoting EI321 (Reply 11):
All in all, airbus are going to be quite Conservative with their development timeframe projections for the foreseeable future after the A380 delays.

 checkmark 
It is far more important for Airbus to get the A350 done right and on time than to get it done early. However it would be great if they can do it, and would go a long way towards repairing the damage done by the A380.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10200 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 12):
It is far more important for Airbus to get the A350 done right and on time than to get it done early.

I'm not sure that that's appropriate in the aviation field, SEPilot. It has that devilish mixture of long lead-times and rapidly-developing technology and commercial trends. Taking longer than is necessary over design and development won't necessarily produce a better aeroplane - in fact, it could result in Airbus having to try to sell a 2007 design in the 2013 market, which may be (probably will be) radically different to the one that exists today.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2487 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10158 times:

Well to be honest, call me crazy, but i think 2013 is even optimistic, because there are 2 major problems, and some other smaller problems. First of all, they have some problems with making a competitive engine, GE (i think) doesn't want to develope an engine that wil be better than the 787 has. Second of all, the most customers didn't make the order firm, as they wan't to see some improvements to the current plans, because it doesn't offer anything more then the 787 , which enters service atleast 5 years earlier, Qatar already pushed up the presure, by also ordering a bunch of 787's.

Also expect Boeing to design a 787-10/777NG ones the final plans for the A350 are announced, which have a major advantage due to the cost savings of airlines, since it will be likely pilots can fly both 777 and 777NG, + type rating on the 787 will be the same.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6673 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10143 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 13):
in fact, it could result in Airbus having to try to sell a 2007 design in the 2013 market, which may be (probably will be) radically different to the one that exists today.

True; but trying to rush and ending up in another snafu like the A380 will be far more costly for them; in fact, I believe they would have difficulty surviving it. But the long lead times you speak of also mean that Boeing will have equal difficulty in incorporating new developments on the 787; where it will give them an advantage in is in their next project, presumably the 737RS/Y1.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineElvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10142 times:

Howdy all,

Let me be the first to say that the 350 will be late, in MY opinion. At least a year maybe two so I am thinking 2015 (ballpark it). I know, I know, I must hate eads, I am an eads basher, I am not a true avaition fan...... That aside bear with me for just a sec. The thing is that although several of eads big paycheck guys have stated publicly that panels are the way to go (and many supporters may be headed to carpal tunnel land with all the typing defending that decision..) it is my opinion that eads is working very hard to deveop the technology to use barrels instead of panels. Then the transition will occur and thus delay the program a couple of years or so. Granted I could very well be wrong. Lets just say that I am a firm believer in the technology of CFRP barrels. If barrels are the way to go then the technology needs to be there not just for the 350v3 but also for the 320 replacement....

Here is a nifty link that has some interesting stuff on this (I did not find this myself. Suffice it to say that Douglas sure knew how to build some tough planes.

http://www.designnews.com/article/CA6441583.html

I could be wrong of course and eads could put that bird in the air in 2013!

Peace

Elvis777



Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
User currently offlineKellmark From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 682 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10130 times:

Quoting Par13del (Reply 5):
Why, what reason exist for this to happen? How many customers of the initial version of the A350 switched to the B-787? Airbus is looking to produce a better a/c than the B-787, their customers have already shown them that they will wait for their product, so Airbus has the time leverage to see how the B-787 performs and improve the A350 to be a much better product. The a.net wisdom already has it that the A350 will make the B-777 obsolete, so how much damage will the A350 do to a B-787 that is already 5-6 years old when the A350 goes into service?

Just because a product is later than its competition doesn't mean it is better. In this case, Airbus will not have the bleedless technology of the 787, nor the barrel composite structure, which provides for better structural integrity, lighter weight, and a more comfortable cabin, just to name a few . The A350 also seems to now be too big to compete effectively with the 787, and fits more against the 777. Also, Airbus is still trying to sort out its own organizational problems internally and it has to deal with all of the politics that come with state involvement, which prevents it from reacting quickly like Boeing can. Does anyone honestly believe that EADS/Airbus will be able to outsource to the same extent that Boeing has done, what with the politics in Europe? I just don't see it. Also, when Airbus really goes for the state aid that they desperately need to make this thing go, there will be a real dog fight over that as well. Early? It is never going to happen. By the time the A350 actually goes into service, Boeing will be selling its new single aisle design to replace the 737 and will also be able to update an already excellent B777 to compete with the A350. And the 787 is in a class all its own a full five years before a less advanced A350 that is now too big to compete directly with it.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29655 posts, RR: 84
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 10120 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Par13del (Reply 5):
Airbus has the time leverage to see how the B-787 performs and improve the A350 to be a much better product. The a.net wisdom already has it that the A350 will make the B-777 obsolete, so how much damage will the A350 do to a B-787 that is already 5-6 years old when the A350 goes into service?

One should remember that when the A350 enters it's design freeze in October 2008, that will give Boeing up to five years (assuming a Q4 2013 EIS) to both follow the A350 and incorporate "block improvements" into the 787 based on in-service data coming back from the airlines.

It would be a mistake to assume the 787 will remain a static, unchanging design for it's life that once Airbus benchmarks, can easily be exceeded.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 10049 times:

Quoting Kellmark (Reply 16):
Also, Airbus is still trying to sort out its own organizational problems internally and it has to deal with all of the politics that come with state involvement, which prevents it from reacting quickly like Boeing can.

A' propos of that, EADS just issued a press statement about the rumoured changes at the top. It's three paragraphs long, but all it actually says is the usual thing - 'No decision has been taken yet....

http://www.eads.com/1024/en/pressdb/...10_eads_shareholder_statement.html

Incredibly, my guess is that the A350 project is still quite a low priority in the minds of Airbus management.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinePM From India, joined Feb 2005, 6840 posts, RR: 64
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 10028 times:

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 13):
First of all, they have some problems with making a competitive engine

Why should that delay EIS? Surely it would make things easier?

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 13):
the most customers didn't make the order firm

Uh? Like who?

Quoting Elvis777 (Reply 15):
the 350 will be late, in MY opinion

Why? The A380 was a cock-up but otherwise Airbus have a pretty decent record of delivering as promised. Plus, they've given themselves longer to do the A350 than Boeing had to do the 787. I can't think of a reason why we can predict that the A350 will be late.

Quoting Kellmark (Reply 16):
Airbus will not have the bleedless technology of the 787

A benefit which has yet to be proven in operation and there are those who argue that the disadvantages outweigh the benefits.

Quoting Kellmark (Reply 16):
Does anyone honestly believe that EADS/Airbus will be able to outsource to the same extent that Boeing has done, what with the politics in Europe?

Er, remind me - which of Airbus and Boeing has just opened a Final Assembly Line in China? And have US unions been indifferent about Boeing outsourcing so much? Do you actually know much about "politics in Europe"?


User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 10021 times:

Quoting VirginFlyer (Reply 8):
A couple of thoughts - one, they may not be able to get the wheels turning properly until the Power 8 reforms are implemented... Also, perhaps the length of the development time indicates that the A350 won't be the only project under active development at Airbus around the turn of the decade - maybe they are conserving resources to be able to get work going on the new short range aircraft at the same time?

There is a third and much more serious issue, which is the root cause of most if not all of Airbus's problems and that is MANAGEMENT. -- or the lack there of. Ten years ago, Airbus was a dynamic, can-do, will-do, get-it done company that brought out the very successful A320 and A330, and what could have been a successful A340 if the price of oil didn't go through the roof. Now we have EADS with the French and German governments micromanaging every move, or so it seems.

What Airbus needs is an effective leader who can make decisions that are based on sound business grounds and not the whimperings of trade unions and politicians. Until that happens, I don't have much faith that anything will happen in a reasonable time frame. Just look at the A350's sordid history of re-design after re-design, with at least one more to come when they finally realize that they are simply building the world's largest flashlight battery with Li-AL and Carbon. SUH had it right, they really need to build the frame of composite, and really should go to barrels.


User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 9999 times:

Let's not forget that the smoke screen that was the 'Sonic Cruiser' hid a lot of composite research that meant that Boeing could truly catch Airbus off guard with the 7E7/787 and make it look like they had a short development time.

User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 873 posts, RR: 11
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 9950 times:

Quoting B777A340Fan (Thread starter):
With the recent rollout of the 787 by Boeing, I was wondering if Airbus had the means to try to get the A350 out before schedule, ultimately to be more competitive with the 787. 2012 is still waaaay out and Boeing may be even further ahead once the A350 is introduced. What do ya'll think?



Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
If Airbus can do so, I expect them to do so.

I think they would be happy just to get it out on time given the recent track record on major projects.

Quoting Par13del (Reply 5):
Airbus is looking to produce a better a/c than the B-787, their customers have already shown them that they will wait for their product, so Airbus has the time leverage to see how the B-787 performs and improve the A350 to be a much better product. The a.net wisdom already has it that the A350 will make the B-777 obsolete, so how much damage will the A350 do to a B-787 that is already 5-6 years old when the A350 goes into service?

About the only way in which the A350 has produced better numbers than the 787 is through the very flawed comparisons Airbus is making between wrong sized models, basically they are taking their bigger models against the smaller 787 models.

There is no reason for Boeing to not match the A350 by simply making the 787 the same length.

Quoting PM (Reply 19):
The A380 was a cock-up but otherwise Airbus have a pretty decent record of delivering as promised.

In the past yes, but their current two projects, the A400M and the A380 have both been plagued by delays. Before that there was the decision and issues with the A340-500 and 600 that while not full of large delays certainly was not a smooth process.


User currently offlineBigJKU From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 873 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 9904 times:

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 21):
Let's not forget that the smoke screen that was the 'Sonic Cruiser' hid a lot of composite research that meant that Boeing could truly catch Airbus off guard with the 7E7/787 and make it look like they had a short development time.

As true as that is I do not see how you can really hold it against Boeing.

Airbus was busy mucking around with the A380 which will be the last major mostly aluminum airliner built. In the process they learned how to make bigger parts and not much more.

Boeing mucked around with the Sonic Cruiser and sold none of them. But they started the process of learning how to build planes in a new revolutionary way.

Airbus should have been doing research into how planes were going to be built for the next 50 years rather than engaging in a prestige project designed to stroke national egos. Because they were not they got burned and will pay for it for several years. An important criteria of any plane development, or any major industrial research effort really, should be taking a look at what knowledge gained from that project can translate into future projects. With the A380 that is not much.


User currently offlineElvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 9892 times:

Howdy PM,

Quoting PM (Reply 19):
Why? The A380 was a cock-up but otherwise Airbus have a pretty decent record of delivering as promised. Plus, they've given themselves longer to do the A350 than Boeing had to do the 787. I can't think of a reason why we can predict that the A350 will be late.

It looks liek you jumped the gun after reading only part of my post. In essence you did not bear with me the second I requested!!

Look at the second part of my post.

Elvis777



Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
User currently offlinePar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 6725 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 9892 times:

EADS / Airbus has politics involved, won't aruge that point. Yes Airbus is building an assembly line in China for the A320, how much production will they be moving from the EU to China, immediately, none. China line is being used to provide aircraft for the Chinese market, note also that the line will be initially limited. Outsourcing in the EU is a big issue, and the unions will not take that lying down, and EADS / Airbus alone cannot and will not change that, regardless of how effective a mamager they get, that issue is political and will be resolved at the highest levels of govt.

With that said, I do believe that the speculation that Airbus will go barrels in time is correct, except they will do the barrels inhouse, the unions will go along because they will be the ones doing the job. Power8 will / may result in some production facilities being "spun off" but not to outside the EU as Boeing has done with some of its 787 production, in a previous thread in the non-av forum, Europeans oft times critize the UK for loosing so much of its local production capacity, I do not see the "continent" doing the same.

If the technology works, Airbus will have no choice but to use it, how is the question.


25 Post contains images PM : I did. I read it. I still can't agree with you. You're biased. I'm objective. (Or is it the other way around...? ) What a game!
26 777236ER : I don't hold it against Boeing, they were very smart. Airbus were sitting pretty at the end of the 90s/start of the 00s, the A320 was selling, the A3
27 Kellmark : Yup, no doubt there are. But you can bet that Boeing has tested it thoroughly . It will save fuel. Just in the amount of weight it saves by not havin
28 Aminobwana : I really do not see what is the reason of this thread in its present form. We do not know how Airbus has planned the 5 years after 10/2008, unfortunat
29 XT6Wagon : The 787 had a year or two of work on configuration in private discussions between airlines and Boeing. I don't know exactly how long this period was b
30 DAYflyer : Or perhaps the A-400M is drawing off a few resources as well. I just think that perhaps Airbus wants to avoid a repeat of the A-380 wiring fiasco.
31 PM : Actually, I've lived here for just short of one year. I have two passports. Both European. (And my mother was born in New York so I could have had a
32 AvObserver : You can believe what you like but I've seen plenty of evidence that the Sonic Cruiser was a serious intent, knocked out of contention by the combinat
33 Kaneporta1 : Any reasoning behind these assumptions? Why would EADS work hard to develop the technology? What's stopping them from just contracting barrels out to
34 SEPilot : Your profile says you are an engineer; I cannot believe that you really believe that. If you were designing a pressure vessel where weight was at a p
35 Stitch : It depends if Alenia non-exclusively licensed the technology to spin barrels to Boeing, or if Boeing exclusively licensed the technology to Alenia. M
36 SEPilot : I have not head anyone except John Leahy (whose engineering credentials I would question) express any enthusiasm for panels. IMHO the customers are c
37 Kellmark : Very curious. So why do you put a Japanese flag? Why not be honest about your citizenship? How ironic. You seem to make a living teaching about a cou
38 Shenzhen : Well, if they changed their time lines, then all the contracts with both their vendors and customers would need to be changed. Cheers,
39 Stitch : Airbus had the flexibility to do so, but it's coming down to provide a plane that's "darn good enough" in time to meet market needs or provide a plan
40 Flysherwood : When was the last time that Airbus completed anything early? It has taken the A380 more than 7 years to get into the hands of their customer. How long
41 Stitch : The A330 and A340 program launch was in June of 1987. First A330 delivery was in late 1993, so 6.5 years. First A340 delivery was March of 1993, so j
42 Spink : Remember that Boeing was working on the infrastructure and development of many of the technologies for the 787 well before they announced it. If you
43 Slider : Especially if the increased chatter about a 787-10 variant has any credence...think about what would be essentially an A/C to slot between the 777-20
44 EXAAUADL : The decision to speed production of the A350 will not be determiend by the 7-8-7 rollout of the 787. It isnt as though that roll out was a surprise...
45 Aerofan : i still don't understand what technological advancements that will be made to allow the A350 to be so superior to the B787. is someone developing engi
46 Post contains images Flysherwood : NOTHING!!! It will NOT be superior to the 787!
47 Post contains images Aerofan : flysherwood, you are a braver soul than i
48 CruzinAltitude : It is debatable that the Sonic Cruiser was a "smoke screen." According to Boeing, they were essentially giving the airlines two options. The very pub
49 Post contains images TeamAmerica : Customers of the initial A350 could not switch to the B787 without risking loss of their deposits. By the time that the A350XWB was introduced the B7
50 SEPilot : John Leahy saying it's better.
51 SEPilot : I believe they can get their deposits back on the grounds that Airbus is not building the plane that they contracted for, nor delivering it when they
52 Kaneporta1 : Your profile says you're an engineer. I cannot believe that you believe that. If you were designing a pressure vessel where weight was at a premium a
53 Stitch : Size. The bigger the plane, the lower the CASM. For what it is worth, when I joined BCA, it was on the Sonic Cruiser project. Alas, I was gone within
54 Post contains images Flysherwood : I love how some people act like the A350 program is just getting off the ground. It has been going for almost 3 years now and they still DON'T have a
55 TeamAmerica : Sure; they can now, but rolling the clock back to when delivery of the original A350 first came into question they didn't have that option. The point
56 Kaneporta1 : I couldn't agree more, but I'll ask you this question, do you think the 787 would be as successful if it had a pair of CF6s hanging, instead of GEnxs
57 SEPilot : First, an airliner IS a pressure vessel because it must be pressurized. Second, Boeing (or its subcontractors) has the ability to vary the thickness
58 Wolbo : I don't believe the A350 will be moved significantly forward from 2013 but it wouldn't surprise me if the A358 and A351 will be delivered earlier than
59 Joni : This isn't an undisputed fact, as Airbus has said the panels yield lower weight, since the thickness can be varied better according to need (upper &
60 Post contains images LifelinerOne : There are rumours that the long development time is due to the fact that engineering resources are also being used for the A320 successor which will s
61 TeamAmerica : The A350 only needs to be as good as the B787 in order to sell. The market for fuel-efficient mid-size airliners is huge, and Boeing cannot supply th
62 Kaneporta1 : Unless you know something that I don't, you can't ramp up and down the inside skin surface when using it as a manufacturing datum. The only way to va
63 Slider : Not to be overly critical of Airbus in this regard, but this is exactly why Boeing took the tack it did with regard to the 787...they realize that th
64 Post contains images Stitch : Probably not. In general, yes, but as SEPilot noted, the maintenance and longevity benefits CFRP brings to the airlines is a more important factor th
65 Dougloid : There was a news item I saw where Boeing is working on reducing the design cycle time for new aircraft from 18 months to 6 months. If they do that, w
66 Rheinbote : Kaneporta1, you can repeat your propaganda ad infinitum, you're wrong, and you know it. The 787 barrel *is* ramped on the inside, e.g. around the doo
67 Justloveplanes : This is the situation in a nutshell, Airbus will have its hand's full with a 2013 delivery date. Some facts: The Farnbourough introduction of the Al-
68 Olle : Sometimes organisations need shakeups. Success is the most nice and you get a false feeling of security. The history might also tell that the crisis i
69 Kaneporta1 : That's the first time I've heard the barrel is ramped. My question is then, how do the remove the barrel from the mould tool? I've never seen a mandr
70 Post contains images Flysherwood : And until they fix things, starting at the top, their development programs will be big fat question marks! It is important that people realize that i
71 Stitch : Sell and deliver A320s and A330s by the skip-load to generate revenue as fast as possible in as continual a stream as possible to fund operations and
72 Flysherwood : For the aviation world in general, I really hope they succeed. Because having a big imbalance between the only two major players is not healthy for a
73 SEPilot : The mandrels are ramped to account for the changes in thickness, and they are not one piece; they are disassembled from inside the barrels after they
74 Romeokc10fe : I just saw a report on CNN Europe that said Airbus and GE are in a tiff about something, that could delay the program!
75 Stitch : Lots of discussion in this forum about the tiff, though it likely will not delay the program.
76 Flysherwood : I don't think that it will cause a delay for the program. GE is saying they aren't going to develop a new engine just for the A350XWB. But Rolls Royc
77 Post contains images PM : Because I live in Japan. I believe that's how quite a few posters choose to interpret the field in 'Profile' where it says "Country" (not, note, "nat
78 Kellmark : How could you guess so easily?
79 Aminobwana : I am not sure. Possibly GE will develop an engine jointly for A3510 and B7811. I assume that the design must be adequate to allow both alternatives R
80 Kaneporta1 : I didn't know that their mandrels can be disassembled from inside. Thanks for the info. There will be a light thin metallic mesh that will be respons
81 Glideslope : IMO, 2013 will be very difficult to meet. I'm still going with 2015 EIS. I expect an early 09 Design Freeze, not late 08.
82 XT6Wagon : Is late 08 design freeze, or just configuration freeze. IE freezing it to "2 engines, 2 wings, 1 tail, etc, etc,"
83 Grantcv : Airliner generations seem to be spaced a dozen years apart - give or take. The Boeing 787 marks the start of a new generation of airliner and is the r
84 Aerofan : ok- so if a new powerplant is possibly not being developed and if aluminum is not the most advance material to use for building an aircraft. then as a
85 Post contains images Qfsis : Early ??? You mean like the A380 ???
86 Dougloid : Aluminum or not, anyone who's ever worked on an airplane that was struck by lightning will tell you that there will be arcing and burns at every join
87 Post contains links Elvis777 : Howdy all, I jsut got back and dont have time to add to the discussion (or answer questions directed at me) but I found this link which might add a bi
88 Stitch : Also interesting that Mr. Wallace confirmed JL called Boeing's process "old fashioned": Guess we can finally put that one to rest.
89 Post contains links Romeokc10fe : This is interesting, no big deal but interesting Airbus pulls video of A350 XWB in customer liveries due to factual error By Barbara Cockburn Airbus h
90 Post contains links and images NAV20 : Not sure that it does dismiss it, Elvis777.   There's always a 'tolerance' in the early stages of any design - sometimes as much as 5% each way on t
91 Insiderinfo : okay guy's... i'm not sure just hw much Airbus really wants the A350 to be a 787 competitor....they'll likely use the concept...copy some of the desig
92 WingedMigrator : The 787 / 777 / A330 / A350 medium widebody market is forecast to be 5000 to 6000 aircraft over the next 20 years. For perspective, consider that Boe
93 Elvis777 : Hi Nav20, Yes I had heard about the proposed deal to make enders the CEO of eads and Gallois the airbus guy. This may be a bit too much to swallow for
94 Insiderinfo : Again guys...!!!!..YES 787/777/330/350 a 6000 frame market....but let's not put them in the same category...that's my point... 787/330 one market wor
95 Post contains images Iwok : There-in is the problem. Since EADS has indicated that state aid will be required, I bet its safe to say that this state aid will have some serious r
96 Insiderinfo : WHAT 200 ORDERS.....?????? I'll repost this paragraph..... let's look at the amount of a350XWB orders..original a350 are all essentially VOID.. so yo
97 Post contains images NAV20 : Agreed, Elvis777 - but Sarkozy is not in a position to dictate anything, he only controls 22.5% of the voting rights, same as Daimler-Chrysler. Even
98 Post contains links Aminobwana : This is announced and denied continuously during the last week,the last denial by EADS as of today: http://www.avionews.com/index.php?co...1076629&pa
99 Azhobo : Seems unnecessary. And by the way you can find many american university professors who have complete contempt for everything american. HOBO
100 Aminobwana : Factually, if I remember well, when Lagardere sold the majority of the shares to France, he retained the omplete 22.5% voting rights. But obviously,
101 Post contains images PEET7G : This answer is not directed at you Par13del, but your post pretty much summed up the views I would like to comment on, so here goes, and no offense m
102 Joni : This...is....normal...in..this...business....think....of...SQ..ordering....A380... and..ANA..B787...
103 Post contains images RootsAir : and knowing them, they will have a delay so don't expect to see the A350 before 2014....I'm sorry but if boeing can make up a whole new concept in 4
104 NAV20 : Please see EADS' Articles of Association, Aminobwana (available on their website) - at present, if the two CEOs disagree, the two Chairmen take the f
105 SEPilot : Perhaps I phrased that wrong. What I meant to say is that the only plane that the A350 will not be clearly more economical than is the 787; as you co
106 Post contains images Joni : One obvious way to square those facts is that using the panels allows to vary the thickness (and other characteristics) better than the barrel method
107 Post contains images Stitch : Yet the panels will need to be thicker along their edges to reinforce the fasteners, and then you have the weight of all those fasteners. Both will i
108 SEPilot : It is not valid to compare a smaller plane to a larger one; given the same technology the larger plane's economics per seat will always beat the smal
109 Aminobwana : Thank you. NAV20 A) As there would be only one CEO, this would become N.A. if not eliminated. I would very much doubt that Daimler would accept a new
110 Kellmark : To me, that is not to their credit. Some people prefer to try to indoctrinate with a particular ideology rather than educate with logic and reason an
111 Post contains links Aminobwana : Regarding Airbus mainstay plan to outsource, as Boeing does, at least 50% of the A350, the URL below shows the relatively moderate postion of the Germ
112 Post contains images Stitch : I imagine it goes to the Board and Spain casts the deciding vote. Why not? After all, Daimler names the Chairman.
113 Aminobwana : This would be logical, but unfortunately not so. The so called "Shareholder Pact" stipulates that no meanigful Board resolution is possible if either
114 Joni : That sounds like a safe assumption. These are already a far cry from saying the A350 isn't "anything near" the B787, which is what the original poste
115 Post contains images NAV20 : It gets almost to be 'musical comedy,' Stitch. The situation is that the Board consists of 11 members - five appointed by the French consortium (Soge
116 Post contains images NAV20 : You could always OFFER a factory for sale on terms like that, Aminobwana (I've actually negotiated some 'sale and leaseback' deals in real life). But
117 B777A340Fan : Why not? Isn't it favoritism? If Boeing always gets the preference, why would airbus do business with them in the future?
118 Aminobwana : ... unless Airbus guarantees them the subcontracts, no matter what, which as said would upturn all the outsourcing concept aminobwana
119 Aminobwana : This is not the reason, such being the B773ER exclussivity contract aminobwana
120 Poitin : It is a safe assumption that Boeing was smart enough to lock up whatever technologies they could with sole license agreements. That is the way busine
121 SEPilot : Yes, but I didn't. Why use my words to refute his? He's entitled to his opinion without being bound by mine. Panels instead of barrels. As I have sai
122 Dougloid : Joni, you're talking as if the A350 exists anywhere except on paper. Let me restate the obvious (which never hurts by the way). The A350 does not exi
123 BigJKU : The real question will be, at least in my view, which plane is more efficient when they are the same length. They will hold the same number of passen
124 SEPilot : I believe that the A350 has a higher MTOW then the 789 has, and the present plans do not call for a higher MTOW for the -10. This will make the compa
125 NAV20 : The reason being, in my view, BigJKU, that the A350 will have a bigger frontal area, a bigger wing, and large numbers of fasteners for the proposed p
126 Post contains images Flysherwood : Now there is the answer to fixing things at EADS and Airbus. Have the French control it!!!
127 Flysherwood : I love it when CASM advantage is pointed out to show that the A350 is going to be more economical. It is very true only if ALL or 95% of the seats ar
128 Stitch : 787 MTOWs 787-3: 364,000lbs 787-8: 480,000lbs 787-9: 540,000lbs 787-10: 540,000lbs A350 MTOWS A350-800: 540,000lbs A350-900: 584,000lbs A350-1000: 65
129 SEPilot : OK, that means that the 789 and A358 are as close to comparable as possible. This will make the actual comparison between them very interesting. Than
130 Ap305 : By your logic or at least part of your logic-the dc-3, the 707 intercontinental, the 747 and the 777 are all inferior to their rivals and should have
131 Aminobwana : I would say that the fact the A350 only existing on paper would not be a negative if it would compete with another "paper aircraft" as it happened so
132 Stitch : Chances are a 787-9 in an airline configuration will carry more then 10 people compared to an A350-800 in the same airline configuration. And the few
133 XT6Wagon : This is if you think the "designed in powerpoint" specs that we have today will be matched by the real specs once its actually put into engineering.
134 Ap305 : How do you know that these are power point specs? What makes you so sure that there is not a team of competent engineers and a lot of hard work behin
135 XT6Wagon : Actually you might want to take that back. Go look at what airbus was selling to airlines with A3XX and then look at the A380 of today. Change happen
136 Ap305 : The a3xx at least in its early guise was a concept presented to airlines. Iam pretty sure that the figures published after official launch have not v
137 Insiderinfo : Obviously you have no idea Joni.....i'll let you think back to when and in what sequence the SQ and ANA orders came...and the type of contract...befo
138 BigJKU : *sigh* Really did not think it would take a full illustration but here goes anyway. A wider plane with the same general shape will generally be less
139 Ap305 : deleted for double post...sorry[Edited 2007-07-11 21:33:42]
140 Ap305 : This I know What if the xwb wing is efficient enough to make up for the frontal area.? Well-the seat width advantage that the 787 had vs the old 350
141 Justloveplanes : I think that for premium (business oriented) operators and LCC's, the 787 has a few advantages: At 8 abreast or 6 abreast in J, it is a smaller and t
142 Post contains images Stitch : But if it didn't have to make up for the frontal area, it would be even better. The 787 was offering one to one and a half inches extra seat width ov
143 BigJKU : That would be great, but the plane would still be less efficient than it could be at 9 seats wide without a really good reason. The seat width on an
144 Ap305 : Even in the lower end of the widebody market there seems to be a differing approach -Airbus thinking bigger with Boeing more focused on fragmenting.
145 Post contains images Ap305 : I will be ok as long as they dont stick 10 abreast in. This is torture on even a 747.
146 Aminobwana : Your approach relating communications with travelling is a good one. It will affect more than anything the Business travellers and therefore the Prem
147 Post contains images TeamAmerica : I don't recall that argument being made...perhaps Boeing's marketing people said it, but nobody bought it. Every customer has the option to outfit th
148 GeorgeJetson : I am really puzzled as to why it’s going to take so long for Airbus to develop the A350. Here we are in the 21st century, the age of computers and o
149 Post contains images TeamAmerica : Ohhhh...dude! You'd best duck now.
150 NAV20 : The function of an airliner's wing is to provide lift, not propulsion, Ap305. It is the job of engine power - and therefore fuel - to overcome the dr
151 Post contains images WingedMigrator : Reduced drag of the wing (what Ap305 was alluding to) is just as good as propulsion as far as the physics of the thing go. However, consider that the
152 Post contains images Iwok : Yes, but that was because the 787 fuse enables 9 abreast, which was impossible in any A350-SF (standard fuselage) width. Now the 350 is wider, but of
153 Joni : This is only possible if we're discussing a patentable invention. Since composites have been used for a/c for ages (by Airbus among others) any paten
154 Post contains images Ap305 : So thats why airframers spend a lot of hours in the wind tunnel(or in the a350's case the computer screen) refining every little twist and turn in th
155 Aminobwana : There is nothing wrong to order a paradigm breaking "paper plane" when there is no competition of already existing or nearly existing aircrafts. As A
156 Dougloid : You say they're idiots, not me. Let me ask you a question. If you sat everyone down who'd ordered the A380 a few years ago and said "Look. The progra
157 Joni : Can you think of any planes currently in service, which would not have had any launch orders - meaning orders before the plane flew? I'm surprised to
158 Aminobwana : Joni: You should have quoted also the second part of my post. I am saying that I see no problem in order a "paper plane" under the appropriate circum
159 Stitch : It doesn't really matter if Airbus can get the machines and the CFRP if Boeing has patented how those machines lay that CFRP to create a fuselage bar
160 Aminobwana : I am not so sure. You cannot extrapolate what they are doing now (as they have no timely acceptable alternative) to what the would have done if told
161 Stitch : They had the 747-X, the 747-X Stretch, the 747-400QXLR, the 747-Advanced and the 747-8I. With the exception of LH and the 747-8I, all of the customer
162 NAV20 : You'll have to specify WHICH way, Ap305. The advances I mentioned were:- "Less frontal area from the ovoid fuselage shape, less drag from the high-as
163 Joni : Again, most planes don't represent a "paradigm shift" (even if the B787 does can be debated), yet all planes do receive launch orders. I'm now even m
164 Post contains links Poitin : No, Boeing doesn't make the lay up machine, but it was built for them and I will guarantee they have exclusive rights to the design. http://na.norths
165 Dougloid : this is kind of an interesting question. It's got more layers than an onion and it's not nearly as simple as it looks. Consider your average CNC mach
166 Aminobwana : Really, I am the surprised one. Again, your quote of the second part of my post is incomplete: you didn't include: Your example of the B748i is there
167 Post contains images Stitch : Making CFRP sails is significantly different from making commercial airliner fuselage barrels. North Sails may have developed the tape laying machine
168 Post contains images Ap305 : So you are sayings its technically possible to have a circular double bubble cross section? Additional joints compared to the 787-yes but "copious us
169 Post contains images Joni : The link in your article doesn't work. However I'd still be interested to have a look at these guarantees of yours. I'll just let this pass, you appe
170 Post contains images Baroque : [/quote] Watch it WM, Victoria may not be amused! There was a long and complex thread in Tech/Ops a while ago started by Astuteman about the differenc
171 Post contains links NAV20 : Right on cue, Baroque, Wallace-PI article on the 787 wing - with, finally, a picture that does the wing design justice and shows how radically-differe
172 Baroque : Not until I know how they compare. As Astuteman wrote span span span span usw! No doubt the 787 wing is something to rave about, but the 350 one coul
173 Post contains images Flysherwood : Not unfair at all. It just means that the 787 will lose less money for the airline.
174 TeamAmerica : What is significant about the Northsails process is the use of a spinning mandrel (moving the work rather than the tape-laying machine) and doing so
175 Joni : It's unbelievable that we're once more having this discussion here. The bleedingly obvious point here, as in all the other threads, is that when the
176 Stitch : Maybe, maybe not. It depends on the demand curve and how much (if any) operators need to discount seats to fill the extra seats an A350 offers over t
177 Jacobin777 : I have still yet to be sold on the that fact....I still see the B789 competing with the A358... A358 Overall length 60.6 m. 198 ft.9 in. Maximum take
178 Aminobwana : Quote= Stitch (Reply 176): corresponding A350 model (787-8/A358 and 787-9/A359)[/quote] I think that both have some misprints (I assume that we agree
179 Post contains images Jacobin777 : I'm not so sure where I have "misprints".... ....my numbers seem to be correct...
180 Aminobwana : Yours: A359 and B789 length difference (absolute difference) = 7 feet 3 inches A359 and B788 length difference (absolute difference) = 12 feet 9 inch
181 Stitch : The point is, the smallest 787 is the -8 and the smallest A350 is the -800. The 787-9 might better match up against the A350-800 in physical dimensio
182 Post contains images Olle : If Boeing can intoduce a 780 with a new win why cant Airbus introduce a smaller A357 with a smaller wing suited for that kind of plane? Even if I cons
183 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ...er, no Aminobwana..I was specifically comparing only the B788/B789 with the A358..no A359 figures in my discussion... ..if that hypothesis were tr
184 Stitch : Well many 787-8 customers are purchasing the planes to replace 767s, not A330-200s, though some airlines like QF, AV and NW are replacing either both
185 Dougloid : And you know this because......?
186 XT6Wagon : Its possible that at this time the breakdown of thier A350 order is meaningless. Its highly likely that Airbus asked them to break it across all 3 ve
187 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ..that again proves my point Stitch... I'm sure we'll see the orders "swing" towards the larger variants of the B787, however, we will probably be se
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 The Beriev Be-2500 Ever Fly? (pic) posted Wed May 23 2007 16:28:49 by EI321
Will The A380 Be In JFK Monday 26th Mar? posted Sun Mar 25 2007 00:10:02 by Tomascubero
Will The A350 Also Have Elect.chromatic Window Pnl posted Tue Dec 19 2006 22:59:09 by AutoThrust
When Will The 747 Be Out Of Passenger Service? posted Sat Dec 2 2006 02:17:47 by Scalebuilder
When Will The 787 Be Rolled Out? posted Mon Oct 30 2006 23:27:41 by NYC777
Could The 748 Be Delivered Early? posted Thu Jun 22 2006 05:18:43 by MCIGuy
What Livery Will The A380 Be In @ LHR? posted Tue May 16 2006 10:40:58 by Artist01
How Long Will The 747SP Be Around? posted Sun Apr 9 2006 22:07:52 by SmithAir747
UA 744s - When Will The Second Be Repainted? posted Wed Dec 7 2005 15:09:38 by NA
When Will The A380 Be In Australia? posted Sat Nov 12 2005 05:44:04 by Aviation