Flying-Tiger From Germany, joined Aug 1999, 4137 posts, RR: 38 Posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11788 times:
Quote: EADS unit Airbus is still under pressure from customers to redesign its A350 XWB model, Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported, citing Steve Udvar-Hazy, head of leasing firm ILFC.
'Teams of engineers are still working together to see what else can be changed,' Udvar-Hazy told the newspaper on the sidelines of an event in Seattle, WA, at which Airbus rival Boeing (nyse: BA - news - people )'s 787 model was being presented.
1. One has seriously to ask what this man actually wants.
2. Airbus & airlines are working together to improve the design - really astonishing news... I would be seriously surprised if this WASN´T the case. I´m firmly expecting every potential customer to voice their wishes and ideas for changes to improve the overall design - that´s what the Design Advisory Groups are for... absolutely nothing new.
3. Appears that the airline / aircraft business is getting more and more "press-release" based.
4. Basically nothing new from Udvar-Hazy except for some more hot air...
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11481 times:
Quoting Keesje (Reply 1): Forbes obviously saw a lack of news / hits and decided to please their public / stir the pot a bit again with a yesterday (Sunday actually) quote.
I thought Mr. Udvar-Hazy mentioned this in an interview with James Wallace form the Seattle P-I and Forbes just picked up the story? If so, and Forbes picked it up, most likely you'll read about it again in other publications for the rest of the week. . . .
Many here simply can't accept the fact that Udvar-Hazy generally gets his way when dealing with the OEM's. In his own words, he sent the old A350 "to the cemetery". Does this latest version have a head stone waiting as well?
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3307 posts, RR: 10 Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11392 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 5): I also find it odd that Qantas seems - from what I have read - to have a different view from Mr. Udvar Hazy. Certainly, Singapore has put their money where their mouth is, and others.
That's right QF said that the original 787 / XNB contest was a pretty close run thing - in a way it was good that they lost and the XWB ended up bein created.
Didn't SUH write soemthing on a $100 bill saying he'd buy 50 of them if AB made a new fuse on it and JL hung that on his wall - maybe it's time SUH put his money where his mouth was!
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11366 times:
Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 7): Didn't SUH write soemthing on a $100 bill saying he'd buy 50 of them if AB made a new fuse on it and JL hung that on his wall - maybe it's time SUH put his money where his mouth was!
Well, if you watch "Godfather II", that C-note can mean a couple of things. . . .
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
McMax From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 302 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 11340 times:
Quoting Mariner (Reply 5): Because finally, why should Mr. Udvar-Hazy care? If he doesn't like the plane, he doesn't have to buy it. He can simply order a ton more 787's.
I would argue that Mr. Udvar-Hazy is looking at the long-term market. If Boeing is permitted to dominate this segment of the market, Boeing will have ultimate market-price control, and for ILFC, that means higher prices it would have to pay in the future for those planes. However, if Airbus can design (and ultimately, build) a credible aircraft which airlines want, it creates healthy competition for the market, thereby pressuring Boeing to keep their prices reasonable. For a healthy, competitive OEM market, a marginally-successful A350XWB which can attract some customers is better than a 787 monopoly for ILFC's purposes.
UAL747-600 From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 564 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10771 times:
It'll be interesting to see what Airbus does. It will be a major embarrassment for them to cancel another version of the A350 or make a major change that will significantly alter EIS. I would think the cost of development funds (external) would be affected.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 28492 posts, RR: 84 Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10706 times:
Quoting McMax (Reply 9): I would argue that Mr. Udvar-Hazy is looking at the long-term market. If Boeing is permitted to dominate this segment of the market, Boeing will have ultimate market-price control, and for ILFC, that means higher prices it would have to pay in the future for those planes. However, if Airbus can design (and ultimately, build) a credible aircraft which airlines want, it creates healthy competition for the market, thereby pressuring Boeing to keep their prices reasonable. For a healthy, competitive OEM market, a marginally-successful A350XWB which can attract some customers is better than a 787 monopoly for ILFC's purposes.
I have heard airlines like Boeing's barrels because they offer lower maintenance and inspection. Airbus' panel approach will likely require more maintenance and inspection, but not in any significant way in the short to mid-term. Still, as a lessor, ILFC needs to take into account those costs over an airframe lifetime often much longer then their customer's lease terms. Since SQ seems to get rid of their planes every decade or so, it's a non-issue for them. They won't hold the planes long enough to see any real differences. Even an airline who hold the plane for two decades probably won't find maintenance and inspection costs to be a serious cost component sending them one way or the other.
But ILFC, GECAS, ALFACO and the others could conceivably be operating these planes for scores of years because of the longevity CFRP offers. And even when they are no longer "fit" for passenger service, that many of these firms also have freighter leasing arms means they could turn them into "787BCFs" or "A350ACFs" down the road and keep on operating them. So over four decades, the maintenance and inspection costs might very well become a serious cost component...
So Mr. Udvar-Hazy may be thinking that, over four decades, an A350 will cost him a noticeable (even if not necessarily an appreciable) amount more to operate than a 787 because of the differences in how they are assembled. That means higher minimum rents for the A350 which could hurt ILFC's ability to place the plane or require they accept less then desired profits due to lowering prices or having to underwrite some of the maintenance and inspection costs.
Justloveplanes From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 963 posts, RR: 1 Reply 16, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10692 times:
'Emirates and us are just the only ones who spoke up publicly,' Udvar-Hazy said.
'But many other airlines are unhappy with (Airbus's) plans, and are pushing Airbus to make changes.' SUH in the Forbes article
This sounds more like what SUH said at Paris before he met with Gallois. I wonder if Forbes is being creative here; using his rather bland comment about engineers still working on the plane - big surprise - and rehashing the Early Paris comments again. Forbes does not have the best history of communicating when it comes to Airbus/Boeing, they tend to be quite superficial in their reporting.
SUH could just be using the media to push for who knows what...same ol, same ol....
Keesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10605 times:
Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 13): The major problem is with the Airbus strategy and its not A350XWB fault per se. Airbus has no competitive offering for a long-haul lower capacity mid-size jet like the 787-8.
Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 13): This is a huge problem for second tier airlines who want range but do not need capacity...
I think the market doesn't need all this range for the majority of flights. Light and efficient up to 250 seats < 4000nm seems an gab for both Boeing and Airbus. I think the 787 / 783 aren't covering this 767/A300/A310/757 market either. Maybe Airbe will come up with a mussled up A320,5 & A321,5.. http://www.airliners.net/discussions...general_aviation/read.main/2724857
Aminobwana From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10539 times:
AEROFAN comments and ask a very pertinent question, under a parallel topic which probably will be deleted:::
Quote: ]"I really don't understand this. This is like bizarro world. In the June 19th edition of Aviation Daily, we have that Parker guy from US saying that the new version of the A350 is fantastic. We also have Qatar and several airlines ordering the plane
Yet here we have a lessor and one of A major customers saying that the product is still not sophisticated enough and they want additional changes. And some people were scared to speak up.
So what's going on? Seems to me that some people who are running some airlines should be put out to pasture if they are hell bent on ordering a product that doesn't meet their requirements. Secondly, why are others being cowed into keeping silent. You would think A is the only game in town"
QR is not so enthusiastic and complains publicly regarding the lack of information by Airbus, aside issuing a parallel order for the B787
Nevertheless, it is quite understandable that airlines managers ordering or intending to order (as USAir) wish to explain to their shareholders or owners the technical benefits of spending these billions, whichever the reasons of the purchase may have been.
IF (and this being a capital one) they have ensured that the contract contains the needed safeguards as penalties and eventual walk-away conditions, and the reasons as pricing, or the desire not to allow the twin aisle business develop to a virtual monopoly, are legitime - even if not purely technical - , there is no reason to put these managers "out to pasture", as you write.
Hot air is what is you hear on A.net. When SUH speaks, it is cold hard cash.
Clearly, he has not kissed and made up with Airbus over the A350 XWB. And given QR grumblings, I would expect that we have not seen the definitive version of the XWB. While I expect that the panels will be retained, the LI-AL frame will go and be replaced by composite. SUH is clearly well informed about the short comings of the airframe.
Quoting Keesje (Reply 18): I think the market doesn't need all this range for the majority of flights. Light and efficient up to 250 seats < 4000nm seems an gab for both Boeing and Airbus. I think the 787 / 783 aren't covering this 767/A300/A310/757 market either. Maybe Airbe will come up with a mussled up A320,5 & A321,5..
While I agree that very few airlines need 8,000 NM range, they want it just in case. Do not expect Boeing or Airbus to build new aircraft that will "only go" 5000 NM. The 787-3 is an exception because it is what the Japanese wanted for their market, and I doubt many will sell anywhere else. They only people interested in short range aircraft are the regionals, and even they are beginning to look at international routes.
Beaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 25 Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10471 times:
Steven F Udvar-Hazy, refugee from the 1956 Hungarian uprising ,has apparently some issues with Airbus as a European Company .
I can see some form of inherent hatred against anything that is not American,since America is the country who took the "refugee" Hazy when he got out of the Hungarian uprising.To me it looks rather a psychological-psysical issue than a technical.
Let's face it-he wants a 787 clone but just bigger and better.Ultimately those companies who find the A350 a great tool to generate money will buy it -with or without Hasy ! The market dynamics will work in favour of the A350.Nobody denies the man a deep understanding of aircraft-technology -he 's a big spender on aircraft.But there are moments were the engineers who bred the machines have a better understanding of what is commercially viable and salable.
Please respect animals - don't eat them...
25 Sabenapilot: What we have here is just another of those warmed over reports in which some old comments are put together to help substantiate a single and rather va