Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff  
User currently offlineElvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 18931 times:

Howdy All,

there is an interview with Udvar-Hazy on Aviation week. It is actually pretty Interesting

here ore some excerpts

"On the wide-body side, there are some airlines that would like to see the production rate of the 787 reach 10 or more a month. But I’m not sure that’s achievable with Boeing’s partners and suppliers. They still can’t demonstrate a flawless execution of producing more than 10 airplanes a month. In fact, we will see whether they can even get to 10 on the schedule they have discussed."

"As far as Airbus is concerned, it’s easy to talk about it producing 10 or even 15 airplanes a month in 2015, since you can make promises far out that most people will forget. Frankly, it has to figure out how it is going to build airplanes, who will be in the supply chain, what percentage of the plane it will build in-house and what percentage will be subcontracted out. But first EADS, the parent company, has structural governance issues that need to be resolved."

And my favorite!!
"Airbus ........ Currently, it lacks the capability to build a single-barrel type structure. Boeing has cornered the proprietary capability on that technology, and I don’t see Airbus or EADS being able to make the investment to acquire it in the next 2-5 years."

“Yes, Steve, you are 100% right, but you are not the one who has to write the checks to develop this new airplane, and now we are in such a hole on the A380, over budget, and have a revenue gap because we are not delivering [A380s]. So how in hell can we spend $12-15 billion to do the perfect airplane?” It is easy for us experts to tell Airbus the requirements of a new airplane, but the question is how can it translate that input into a corporate investment when it has got all these uphill issues to deal with? That’s the dilemma.


"I think some of the customers that have signed up say, “Look, Airbus, you’ve got six years to get your act together. When you’ve built this airplane, if you come up 2%, 3%, 4% short—we hope you don’t, but if you do—you will have to write us a check every month for the shortfall.” The thing is, Airbus can’t refuse that type of a commitment, otherwise it can’t sell the airplane. Because now there’s a benchmark called the 787."


And loads more. Really interesting article

You can find the rest here

Straight Talk
Aviation Week & Space Technology
Aug.,8,07, pp 58


peace

Elvis777

[Edited 2007-08-06 08:05:11]


Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
319 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAA7295 From Australia, joined Aug 2007, 615 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 18872 times:

Wow. Certainly some handy info there.

If Boeing introduces the 787-10, will they have to increase production?


Regards,
AA7295


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3321 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 18809 times:

Quoting AA7295 (Reply 1):
If Boeing introduces the 787-10, will they have to increase production?

Boeing's ability to increase production and desire to increase it is in no way related to the 787-10. Currently they are limited in the production rate they promise by time. Its a waiting game to see how the currently production ramp up is going before they can promise any more increases in production in the future. With that increase in production, they currently have plenty of customers willing to drop cash for getting 788 or 789 ASAP. So If Boeing increases the production rate, It will still currently sell out even without a 787-10. Now Its true that they put off the 787-10 till 2013 for the simple reason that there is no point to having it sooner with the ability to fill any number of slots prior to that with other models, and a 100% sell out rate on the current production plan.


User currently offlineSlz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 18777 times:

I think UH is right on the things he knows most about: production issues.

Both manufacturers will introduce their new planes with modest and cautious production rates, and slowly increase them as they get confidence in the abilities of their supply chain. I am pretty convinced in there lays one of the reasons for Boeings reluctance to launch the 787-10, the other one being that it would be a greatly inferior plane without a serious re-do for which Boeing doesn't feel much appetite (cost-time-efford-and most importantly ending off the entire 777, whereas the 787-10 only replaces the 772).

On the technical note however, UH is all too easily loosing the big picture so it seems:
It has been discussed in detail several times in the past already -and the conclusion has always been- that barrel vs pannel approach could indeed hand operational decisive superiority to the barrel planes, but on the barrel vs shell approach their is no decisive winner really.

Whether one slices up the composite hull in longitudinal shells, or circumferencial barrels, the result is that composite pieces need to be joined together on a frame: the only differentiator remaining is the number of joints and that greatly depends on the size of the pieces one needs to join together and any way even on the plane with the largest number of joints (in relation to its size) the number of joints will have been reduced massively against the current production processes, making the percentage difference between the 2 methods so small that it is very well offsetable through other means, like more efficient wing, better engines etc etc...

Anybody else noticed Steve has made some unfortunate comments lately which clearly showed he misses technologicial knowledge to participate in a discussion on the production method of planes, most notoriously his public question to Airbus how they thought to fasten a composite fuselage on an aluminium frame: to which the answer simply was: just like Boeing will do on the 787!  embarrassed 

Maybe SQ should give him a detailed briefing?


User currently offlineAzhobo From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 348 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 18735 times:

Quoting Elvis777 (Thread starter):
“Yes, Steve, you are 100% right, but you are not the one who has to write the checks to develop this new airplane, and now we are in such a hole on the A380, over budget, and have a revenue gap because we are not delivering [A380s]. So how in hell can we spend $12-15 billion to do the perfect airplane?” It is easy for us experts to tell Airbus the requirements of a new airplane, but the question is how can it translate that input into a corporate investment when it has got all these uphill issues to deal with? That’s the dilemma.

Who is making this comment ("and now we are in such a hole on the A380, over budget, and have a revenue gap because we are not delivering" - in first person) ??? Sounds like someone from airbus, but seems more likely just the reporter from the magazine.


User currently offlineCobra27 From Slovenia, joined May 2001, 1003 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 18724 times:

My favourite statement:

Quoting Elvis777 (Thread starter):
"As far as Airbus is concerned, it�s easy to talk about it producing 10 or even 15 airplanes a month in 2015, since you can make promises far out that most people will forget

Big Mouth talking


User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 5925 posts, RR: 34
Reply 6, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 18667 times:

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 3):
Whether one slices up the composite hull in longitudinal shells, or circumferencial barrels, the result is that composite pieces need to be joined together on a frame: the only differentiator remaining is the number of joints and that greatly depends on the size of the pieces one needs to join together and any way even on the plane with the largest number of joints (in relation to its size) the number of joints will have been reduced massively against the current production processes, making the percentage difference between the 2 methods so small that it is very well offsetable through other means, like more efficient wing, better engines etc etc...


You've brought up some good points and, as I've never really thought much about Airbus' approach, I now see that there are some advantages.



Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 18192 times:

Quoting Elvis777 (Thread starter):
Boeing has cornered the proprietary capability on that technology, and I don’t see Airbus or EADS being able to make the investment to acquire it in the next 2-5 years."

Confirms what several of us have been posting for awhile. Thank you for posting this interview. Hopefully, AWST will post this article on the web soon.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 18135 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 9):
Hopefully, AWST will post this article on the web soon.

Yes, so we get the full text.

For now he's cool, next time he gives his opinion on the 737 / 747-8 / 777 he is mr Big Mouth again  biggrin 



User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 9, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 18100 times:

One of my favorite photos, Keesje! But didn't you leave someone out?  Wink


"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 18101 times:

Quoting AirTranTUS (Reply 5):
Quoting Chiad (Reply 4):
Free food and drinks for the Boeing cheerleaders.

And food for thought for the Airbus lovers.

Agreed. If only the quotes were less selective. I'd like to see the full article, not just a dissection.

Quoting Elvis777 (Thread starter):
"On the wide-body side, there are some airlines that would like to see the production rate of the 787 reach 10 or more a month. But I'm not sure that's achievable with Boeing's partners and suppliers.



Quoting Elvis777 (Thread starter):
"Airbus ........ Currently, it lacks the capability to build a single-barrel type structure. Boeing has cornered the proprietary capability on that technology, and I don't see Airbus or EADS being able to make the investment to acquire it in the next 2-5 years."

What does it say in the part of the quote that you have omitted? For those at the back of the room, Boeing is not building a single barrel structure either, they are building part of it. Its a double edged sword. Most of the composites in the 787 are being outsourced, which brings us directly back to the production issues that form part of the topic of this article.


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 11, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 18082 times:

Post deleted by author.

[Edited 2007-08-06 15:04:13]


"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 18043 times:

Quoting Keesje (Reply 10):
One of my favorite photos, Keesje! But didn't you leave someone out?

   Yes, I forgot techies have good visual memory. The guy with the funny glasses left the company so is "ex communivcated" btw I used this picture already some time ago without Forgear. I wonder what happened with him..



[Edited 2007-08-06 15:11:24]

User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 36
Reply 13, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 18003 times:

Quoting Elvis777 (Thread starter):
"I think some of the customers that have signed up say, “Look, Airbus, you’ve got six years to get your act together. When you’ve built this airplane, if you come up 2%, 3%, 4% short—we hope you don’t, but if you do—you will have to write us a check every month for the shortfall.”

First of all, that part is all in quotes - it appears to be a direct quote from Udvar-Hazy. And he'd be in a good position to know what sort of offers Airbus is making, as he must have had negotiations with Airbus within the last month.

Secondly, on the face of it it's crazy in business terms - offering subsidies to your clients if you can't meet specification; effectively paying their extra fuel costs long-term. But Leahy is actually on record as having recommended back in January 2006 that Airbus do just that, in the hope of getting some orders for the A340:-

“Is it a good investment [for Airbus] to spend a couple of billion dollars to get a better aircraft when you can solve the fuel burn problem with money?” asks Leahy. The A340-600 and 777 have “comparable ranges and seat counts and Rolls-Royce guarantees that maintenance costs for four engines are the same as the twin,” says Leahy. “I can agree a figure with a customer that reflects the fuel burn delta and run that out over 12 years and pay it to them,” he adds."

http://iagblog.blogspot.com/2006/01/...us-to-offer-cash-back-on-a340.html

If they really are offering deals like that, IMO it moves the whole thing out of the field of mere business and into the realms of 'musical comedy' - or even 'farce.' Any such deals would be completely open-ended, Airbus/EADS would be just about certain to incur huge losses.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 17923 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 15):
If they really are offering deals like that, IMO it moves the whole thing out of the field of mere business and into the realms of 'musical comedy' - or even 'farce.' Any such deals would be completely open-ended, Airbus/EADS would be just about certain to incur huge losses.



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 15):
it appears to be a direct quote from Udvar-Hazy. And he'd be in a good position to know what sort of offers Airbus is making, as he must have had negotiations with Airbus within the last month.


Astonishing if this is the case! SUH is offering a rare insight into the way Airbus is flogging this aircraft in order to gain traction in the market place. I would dearly love to see the whole interview.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 17910 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 11):
One of my favorite photos, Keesje! But didn't you leave someone out?

Not only that, but they should take out the A-380F since it technically has no orders or isn't even being built.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineUAL747-600 From United States of America, joined Sep 1999, 567 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 17903 times:

Some other interesting tidbits fromt the article:

1) He doesn't think the A350 Airbus is selling today is necessarily on their drawing boards. It will be refined by Boeings experience with 787.

2) The lack of a committed second engine manufacturer on A350 is putting Airbus at a serious competitive disadvantage.

3) He thinks the 737NNG will be small widebody incorporating 787 technology.

UAL747-600


User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 17, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 17882 times:

Quoting UAL747-600 (Reply 18):
2) The lack of a committed second engine manufacturer on A350 is putting Airbus at a serious competitive disadvantage.

Although EADS may wait awhile for an A350 order from ILFC (not to mention GECAS!), the EK order for 100 at the Dubai Airshow will certainly breathe life into this program. I know I'm in "broken record" mode by maintaining that EK will order the A350XWB, but the investment by Dubai Inc. almost assures this--Udvar-Hazy's criticisms notwithstanding.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineElvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 17605 times:

Howdy All,

Quoting Azhobo (Reply 6):
Who is making this comment ("and now we are in such a hole on the A380, over budget, and have a revenue gap because we are not delivering" - in first

It is UH in response to a question.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 10):
Yes, so we get the full text.

Keesje, the full text is up. You need a subscription for it. The full text is in the same vein. UAL747 added a bit more in his post. I cannot post the whole article! Suffice it to say it is all in the same vein. There was more stuff about eads than boeing.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 12):
What does it say in the part of the quote that you have omitted? For those at the back of the room, Boeing is not building a single barrel structure either, they are building part of it. Its a double edged sword. Most of the composites in the 787 are being outsourced, which brings us directly back to the production issues that form part of the topic of this article.

Sorry I ommitted that part. It was Late. UH was answering a question. Here is the full quote:

AW:Airbus has been trying to convince you that its concept of attaching composite panels to an aluminum substructure to build the A350 fuselage is the right approach. But you disagree because of concerns over weight, fuel economy and long-term maintenance. How strongly do you feel about Airbus needing to devise another strategy?

UH:"Airbus is aware of those issues and is trying to balance a number of factors. Currently, it lacks the capability to build a single-barrel type structure. Boeing has cornered the proprietary capability on that technology, and I don�t see Airbus or EADS being able to make the investment to acquire it in the next 2-5 years.
I recently talked to their chief engineer who is analyzing other options. One of them is a composite skeletal frame to which they would attach panels using some metal threads or metal fused into the composite skeleton. There�s no resolution yet."


Peace

Elvis777



Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
User currently offlineTKV From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 17462 times:

I found this article dated Aug. 3 on the Aviation week website, re: a SUH interview. It is not the article referred by Elvis ( I do not know if it refers to the same interview!) but covers some related issues and is certainly interesting
"Straight Talk: More From Udvar-Hazy On Commercial Aviation"
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/searc...w%3Dstory%26id%3Dnews%2FEXILFC.xml

where between other is written:

Udvar-Hazy is confident Boeing Co. can avoid the kinds of severe manufacturing problems, such as parts shortages, that forced a temporary shutdown of some assembly lines in 1997.
"When I talk to [Chairman and CEO James] McNerney and [Boeing Commercial Airplanes President Scott] Carson and their teams, it's clear they don't want to repeat previous mistakes" and push production rates "to the point where one major subcontractor or supplier could create a choke point"
--------------------
"Part [EADS's] problem is that since [former CEO Noel] Forgeard left, there have been a lot of behind-the-scenes changes. If you look throughout the Airbus organization -- in engineering, design, finance -- it's been like a huge revolving door. John Leahy is probably the only one that is still in the same spot, and he has more handcuffs on him".
--------------------
"[Airbus] will have to build an airplane that has more seats so they can offer a lower unit cost per seat, even though the trip cost might be higher on an A350-800 to fly from, say, Los Angeles to London. The only way [Airbus] can do that is with an airline with guaranteed maintenance costs, guaranteed fuel burn and guaranteed runway performance. If they don't, the airplane won't sell."
--------------------
"What Airbus wants GE to do -----------. What they want to do is take the GEnx engine and make some little changes, maybe increase fan diameter a little bit, maybe tweak the compressor section a little bit, do some other things. They do not want to invest in an all-new engine."
]

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 19):
I know I'm in "broken record" mode by maintaining that EK will order the A350XWB, but the investment by Dubai Inc. almost assures this--Udvar-Hazy's criticisms notwithstanding.

1) Dubai investment in EADS, about M$ 800 is small compared with the price of 100 A350 or B787. Assuming net M$ 100 each, it would be B$ 10 ! (the investment being only 8% of the aircrafts total price!)

Consequently, the investment is only one of the factors to be considered by EK, the other being between other net prices, delivery dates, technical data, operating costs at expected real conditions, guarantees and generally, reliability of the offered data and timing. And also if EK wishes to put all their eggs in a sole basket, if not so, a split, even if denied by Tim Clark (possibly only as a component of his negotiating strategy), shall not be discarded.

2) As the Dubai Fund itself has stated, their policy is guided by the criteria to invest in sharply undervalued companies which nevertheless are not in danger of failure. EADS, given its importance within the EU and its strategic relevance, and additionally being the only competitor of Boeing on the non-regional civil market, can and will not fail and therefore recuperate in due time, independently of which way EK's order goes, which is the rationale behind Dubai's attitude.

TKV


User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 17411 times:

Quoting Elvis777 (Reply 18):
Keesje, the full text is up. You need a subscription for it. The full text is in the same vein.

Thnx anyway. Lets hope he stays a strong public 787 supporter in the next few months.


User currently offlineFlysherwood From United States of America, joined Jul 2006, 1115 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 17398 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 15):
ot only that, but they should take out the A-380F since it technically has no orders or isn't even being built

Not TECHNICALLY.
 no 


The A380F has NO orders!!!  Wink


User currently offlineTKV From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 17232 times:

Quoting Elvis777 (Reply 18):
AW:Airbus has been trying to convince you that its concept of attaching composite panels to an aluminum substructure to build the A350 fuselage is the right approach. But you disagree because of concerns over weight, fuel economy and long-term maintenance. How strongly do you feel about Airbus needing to devise another strategy?

UH:"Airbus is aware of those issues and is trying to balance a number of factors. Currently, it lacks the capability to build a single-barrel type structure. Boeing has cornered the proprietary capability on that technology, and I don�½t see Airbus or EADS being able to make the investment to acquire it in the next 2-5 years.
I recently talked to their chief engineer who is analyzing other options. One of them is a composite skeletal frame to which they would attach panels using some metal threads or metal fused into the composite skeleton. There�½s no resolution yet."

I see that SUH has circumvented the response to the question "How strongly you feel", !!

If an option as described in the last paragraph or some other are still being considered, this implies that the present solution is still not considered final. If finally chosen, I assume that this would change between other the weight of the aircraft ?? If so, would this have substantive influence on the performance, overall design and engines ??

TKV


User currently offlineSunriseValley From Canada, joined Jul 2004, 4614 posts, RR: 5
Reply 23, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 17211 times:

quote=Slz396,reply=3]the other one being that it would be a greatly inferior plane without a serious re-do for which Boeing doesn't feel much appetite (cost-time-efford-and most importantly ending off the entire 777, whereas the 787-10 only replaces the 772).[/quote]


A "fair quote" from an article by Geoffrey Thomas in the August edition of Air Transport World......

"787 Program VP Mike Bair has promised airlines that as good as the first 787 is, it will "only get a whole lot better" as the industry further refines composite materials that make up approximately 50% of the Dreamliner by weight. For example, Bair tells ATW that the manufacturer has found ways to reengineer the 787 to save weight and the saving is so significant that it can launch the 50-passenger stretch 787-10 and meet airline demands of "777-200ER range" without increasing MTOW."

So does this mean a 135800lb payload at a range of 5800nm with a MTOW of 563000lb. If so this is a payload improvement of about 6600lb and a range improvement 400nm or thereabouts over previous numbers.


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (6 years 8 months 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 17114 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 15):
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 11):
One of my favorite photos, Keesje! But didn't you leave someone out?

Not only that, but they should take out the A-380F since it technically has no orders or isn't even being built.

Its not even being offered by the looks of things.


25 SEPilot : The barrel approach does NOT require a separate frame; it does have circumferal hoop frames (composite, NOT aluminum) within the barrels, but there a
26 Glideslope : I love how we all go round and round on sooo many different paths. Yet it always comes down to the same On-Ramp. IMO, Airbus needs to be free of EADS
27 Birdbrainz : Maybe that's why Boeing is waiting on the 787-10. They might figure that they're going to have to reengineer it anyhow. Why not do that once you've l
28 Stitch : If Boeing has indeed reduced the MEW of the 787 by a significant amount (10t or more), then the 787-10 becomes a much more capable plane at 560,000lb
29 BoomBoom : This is a contradiction. How could the barrel approach have "operational decisive superiority" but "their[sic] is no decisive winner really"?
30 Post contains links and images Rheinbote : Not that U-H has any problem with that: http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gener...p?channel=comm&id=news/EXILFC.xml# "Part [EADS's] problem is that sinc
31 9252fly : Interesting! If there is that much potential weight reduction,could it not be said that both the 788 and 789 will also benefit? Clearly,that implies
32 Post contains images EA772LR : WHAT!!?? Already?? Damn. Then they could certainly build the 787-8 or 787-9LR versions that reach 9500nm + in range, and as I've said in other posts,
33 Stitch : Airbus has "guaranteed" the performance of the A350, but they're still working on how to meet those guarantees. If, in the end, Airbus can't meet thos
34 Poitin : Well, that would be a conflict in interest for SUH, would it no?. Anyone who has bought or sold in the industrial equipment market knows that a manuf
35 Lumberton : Well put, despite the very public statements of Mr. Clark and Mr. Dixon! From the article reference by Rheinbote in post #30: This is the first refer
36 XT6Wagon : and IMO is too little too late. Even if he had 0% to do with Airbus's current issues, Its apparent that so far every program that has happened on his
37 Post contains images TKV : But they should tell (possibly "commit to" will be a too strong term) airlines that they will provide a competitive solution once Airbus commit !!! I
38 Stitch : But how much input did Leahy have on those programs? His job was to sell planes, not conceive, design, implement, and produce them. If he had to disc
39 Post contains images EA772LR : couldn't agree more Stitch. As much of a loud mouth Leahy may be, and as much as I disagree with his rhetoric, he is doing what he is hired to do. Se
40 TKV : and IMO is too little too late I am not sure that anyone would have been able to make the A380, A340 and the original A350 big success, once the B787
41 BoomBoom : Perhaps he makes promises the engineers, managers and machinists can't keep. Look at how often "Old Big Mouth" has had to eat his words in the past.
42 Joni : I think that any guarantees Airbus has given are not relative to what the B787 does, but hard figures. And more, I'd be surprised if they weren't gua
43 Birdbrainz : They're telling every airline about the upcoming 787-10, and it even appears in a PPT presentation that Boeing gave about a year ago in Cape Town. Th
44 TKV : If we try to visualize the situation today if Airbus had not been able to book the large amount of orders in Paris, we would realize that failure to
45 Gbfra : There is no overall answer. John Leahy had significant influence on particular models, on others he didn't have much influence.[Edited 2007-08-06 23:
46 Stitch : I imagine Leahy was reporting back to Airbus management what his customers were telling him. I see most of his "jawing" as just sound-biting in the m
47 Gbfra : This is the reason why the A350 has become the A350XWB. The famous "clash" on the A350 between Leahy and Udvar-Hazy at a conference was, as many peop
48 Post contains images Stitch : Note that my comment related to the past, and not the present.
49 Lumberton : Not according to SUH! From the Aviation Week article quoted earlier: Edit. I finally realized that you were agreeing with SUH![Edited 2007-08-07 00:2
50 Elvis777 : Hi Nav, Yeap it sure moves it out into left field. But I ma not sure what other option there is right now. Remember our previous conversation where we
51 Post contains images Elvis777 : Howdy SLZ, Have you checked this with Keesje?! You know how much ink (or keystrokes) has been spilled defending the superiority of panel vs barrels? G
52 ChiGB1973 : I wonder if Mr Udvar-Hazy is concerned with the resale prices of his 777s. M
53 Stitch : Resale for the 777 remains very strong, though the 77W is starting to eat into the 772ER.
54 Poitin : Hey, as soon as they release specs, they are committed. Clark and Dixon are both trying to play Boeing against Airbus for their own ends and Airbus i
55 Post contains images Astuteman : Just how much do we think the composite barrels actually weigh? Have they completely disappeared? What other composite technology applied to the 787
56 Post contains links NAV20 : OK, I'll push the boat out for the sake of debate - even though Slz396 will probably have me burned at the stake for saying such things. And even tho
57 Rheinbote : I'm not sure. I think that Boeing has considerably more experience with composite wings at least, starting with A-6E Intruder replacement wing kits,
58 Post contains images Gbfra : Yes, like Alan Mulally......
59 SEPilot : There was a post on another thread a couple of months ago (I don't have the time to find it; I can't remember the topic) by someone who worked for a
60 Joni : I think so too - i.e. you (or me) don't know. One wonders, if people get some kind of kicks speculating how Airbus would be about to fail, when Airbu
61 Post contains links and images Keesje : I think many have been saying barrels is not to only way to succes. In this "you' re either with us or against us" world that quickly becomes "agains
62 Post contains images Stitch : I pulled that 10t figure out of a hat, but if Bair is right that they have saved so much weight they can get 500-1000nm more range out of the 787-10
63 Post contains images NAV20 : At least Boeing are DOING things, Keesje. Perhaps you'd care to give us a list of the things EADS/Airbus have actually DONE since 'the balloon went u
64 Post contains images BoomBoom : Mulally wasn't fired...
65 Post contains images Keesje : Outselling Boeing, setting a new benchmark in the 300-350 segment according to Aboulafia (& Qantas & Cathay & BA? ), increasing production rates on a
66 TKV : You are right. Airbus could eventually succeed, in such case the ones gloating basing on a failure would be in a very arkward position. But I think t
67 EA772LR : You're absolutely correct Poitin. I tend to believe Boeing is in no rush to release a 787-10 until they no what Airbus is doing, which is what many h
68 Poitin : You know, I read this several times and still don't know what to think about it. You do make a point but is it what really happened? A while ago ther
69 EA772LR : Why did Streiff resign?? Was he aware of the mess Airbus was into and decided to get out??
70 Poitin : I have absolutely no doubt Streiff understood the issues and problems at Airbus even though he was there for just a few months. He was nobody's fool.
71 TKV : I have no reason to doubt that Enders will try to do whatever is necessary, as long as EADS does not object. As Enders task is a typical "turn around
72 Flysherwood : When did Airbus outsell Boeing since mid 2006?
73 Flysherwood : I have talked to a few pilots who feel that Boeing airplanes are built by engineers and Airbus aircraft are built by salesman. A two year delay cause
74 Post contains images WINGS : Airbus outsold Boeing in the first half of 2007, mainly thanks to the surge of orders at the Paris Air Show ( Le Bourget). Regards, Wings
75 Stitch : But did Leahy do that on his own initiative, or did management give him permission? Leahy sells planes, no question about that. But if he sells plane
76 Post contains images Flysherwood : Since when is the first half a measuring unit? And where is Airbus' count now compared with Boeing?
77 Post contains images Flysherwood : What does it say when the biggest customer of Airbus aircraft has spent the last couple of years telling Airbus to get their collective rear ends in
78 Post contains images Stitch : I believe they still have a slight edge in actual booked orders and a good edge in terms of announced orders that have yet to be formally booked.
79 Joni : How is the risk level unusually high fir Airbus here? Which customers have hinted this, do you have links to documents? And what exactly do you mean
80 Flysherwood : Boeing shows 688 for 2007. The last I saw, Airbus showed 643. Did a new figure come out that I missed?
81 Post contains images Flysherwood : The biggest customer of Airbus aircraft. And he said so in the article that was part of the threadstarter!
82 Post contains images Stitch : Nope, that is the current count per Hamlet69, though Airbus' numbers do not include any orders signed in July, while Boeing's does. But that's why I
83 ChiGB1973 : I am talking in 5 years. M
84 Post contains images Flysherwood : Sounds like you are taking as gospel the figures and numbers coming from Airbus? Funny, the first 787 is a couple of months from flying, where is the
85 Post contains images Rheinbote : , Airbus is not profitable right now because they cannot deliver on the promises they made 3-5 years ago. Hope they can deliver on the promises they m
86 Stitch : I am talking in 5 years. 777-200ER Values (2006 Delivery) 2007 Value: $126.9 million 2011 Value: $ 97.4 million 2014 Value: $ 72.6 million 777-300ER
87 Tdscanuck : Because Airbus is about more than finances. Boeing and Airbus live in significantly different business/political climates. Airbus wants to make money
88 Post contains images Lumberton : Given the quotes cited in this thread, it sounds as if Steven Udvar-Hazy may be one of them. Is that all? Seriously, the markets seem to be taking no
89 Poitin : I am not sure what the goal of "market share" is. If it is political grandstanding, much like what the Soviet Union did for 50 years to "prove" it as
90 Post contains images Flysherwood : In the end, no matter how big a company you have, HUBRIS will kill you!!! This nonsense on A.net of knocking the 747 off its perch as the biggest onl
91 Gbfra : Only means something to whom? Millions of passengers who will fly on the A380 in the coming years and even many more million people who will see the
92 Tdscanuck : That was my point about Airbus and Boeing being in different business/political environments...for Airbus, the bottom line is not the only thing that
93 GRIVely : I am not particularly pro-Boeing or anti-Airbus but as an observer of the aviation scene I was struck by the difference between the roll out of the A3
94 Wolbo : Ergo, the logical conclusion would have to be that since Leahy is still around the scenario as you describe, as interesting as it may be, simply has
95 Stitch : I'm sorry, but I just cannot - and will not - accept the line that Airbus was created solely to give Britain, Spain, France and Germany "bragging rig
96 Post contains images Stitch : I am pretty sure at least one of our Senators was there along with a few Congressfolk.
97 HawkerCamm : On the contrary with the current 787/777 vs 350 offerings I would say Boeing has Airbus beaten hands down in the 787-8
98 Post contains images Flysherwood : Well the taxpayers of Europe should care if it is making money or not. The banks might care if the thing makes money or not. I am pretty sure the sha
99 Post contains images Astuteman : Risking sounding like a troll (not my intent), it's easy to see how adding 10t to the MTOW, to give a 255t (560 000lb) 787-10, gets you a 320 seat pl
100 Post contains images Stitch : Works for me and, I imagine, it works for many carriers.
101 EA772LR : Yep, and I think the problem with the 380, is that it is too big too late. The world was marveled at the size and range of the 747 and for years it w
102 Gbfra : Right, but this is not what I was writing about. The A380 will of course dethrone the B747 (and later the B748) as the biggest civil airplane. This r
103 Post contains images AirFrnt : And Airbus fans will love him again. I didn't notice too many people complaining with the dark prince, Richard Aboulafia started commenting on the 35
104 JTR : I bet EADS shareholders care.
105 Post contains images Flysherwood : What I am calling nonsense is the thought that the A380 was built because it would give Airbus the biggest plane. If in fact that was part of the dec
106 Gbfra : These aren't rumours, it's a fact. It's a fact too, that Leahy's freedom of action is smaller today than it was. It has been written numerous times i
107 GRIVely : Stitch you are no doubt correct that there were some state and federal politicos there. But they weren't up on the stage making speeches. That was le
108 Gbfra : This thought would in fact be nonsense. Many people here seem to have forgotten that in the mid-nineties Airbus AND Boeing were working together on a
109 Lumberton : I remember reading something along similar lines. What were the "unsound" deals that inspired this move and cost J.L. his flexibility? Wasn't Toby Br
110 Flysherwood : I believe that Boeing did not believe in the future of the VLA. Airbus did, hence the A380. We are now starting to get a taste of who was right in th
111 Gbfra : "Unsound" is my wording and it might be exaggerated. Anyway, under the reign of Forgeard Airbus had made deals that EADS didn't like much when they d
112 Post contains images Astuteman :
113 Tdscanuck : I certainly didn't say that, and I'm not sure that anyone else in this thread did, so I'm not sure who you're disagreeing with here. Airbus was creat
114 BoomBoom : Because they are crap?
115 Post contains links Poitin : Much like the West and the Soviet Union had different goals. Well, there are the minor little points of what Washington would do if they charged $1 f
116 Post contains images Khobar : And they'll all probably think it's the new Boeing. According to Airbus: "Firm orders in June were paced by the flurry of business announced at the P
117 Post contains links and images BoomBoom : It's better to look at the BIG picture. Of course gross unit orders don't tell you anything about the percentage of widebodies, or profit margin. Sti
118 Post contains images Flysherwood : I wonder if anyone realizes how long it is actually going to be before millions of people will have ridden on an A380? At the rate it is going that m
119 Post contains images Keesje : Thnx, lets help you with some more info.
120 Baron95 : It has been widely repported that Airbus has offered fuel costs compensation AND re-purchase price guarantees on A346 deals in campaigns against the
121 TKV : I am still not sure if the remark of SUH reharding the position of Leahy was positive or negative ! ??? Totally Agreed. But it was part of the strate
122 Gbfra : Dream on. That's one difference between the A380 and the B787. The A380 is easy to reckognize because there is no similar airplane around. The B787 l
123 Post contains images Lumberton : Well, EAD.PA is down over 10% since the Paris Airshow so maybe someone's figured it out? It was down 2% today. Could that possibly because the market
124 Olle : Regarding: >I don't know why you are so surprised at this. It is business as usual. The impact on CASM for the relatively small fuel >efficiency defic
125 Gbfra : Boeing walked away? You're kidding. Boeing tried to offer an enlarged version of the B747 in the second half of the nineties and at the beginning of
126 Post contains images BoomBoom : Thanks, I didn't know they were that close! Looks like Boeing is right on schedule to overtake Airbus in deliveries in 2008. And of course the graph
127 Keesje : Boeing upped their VLA forecast in recent years and launched / stretched the 747-8i. Hubs are expanding, new ones are build everywhere. The A380 has
128 Stitch : Alas, it had terrible economics and sold even worse then the 767-400ER. Heck, their current value is lower then a 767-300ER...
129 Post contains links and images BoomBoom : They walked away from an all new VLA. RE: 1st SIA A380 Delivered Earlier (by Zvezda Jul 20 2007 in Civil Aviation)
130 TKV : Of course, what I said didn't apply for low cost and modest enlarged derivates, but for greatly enlarged radically new models, which would have absor
131 EA772LR : While you are generally correct, I have to disagree with you here Keesje. Boeing elected not to commit to an entirely new design for a VLA and opted
132 Gbfra : Yes, perceptions can change. Look back at Boeing at the beginning of the last decade. They were simply in a mess. The B737 sold well and the B777 loo
133 Post contains images TKV : Hubs are surly expanding, ther are inevitable where non-stop connections are not possible. I cannot imagine that anybody is fond of them !! TKV
134 Post contains links Keesje : EA772LR I am amazed how people constantly try to burry the A380 before EIS. It is endlessly repeated and many start to believe just because of it. Mo
135 Stitch : Ya know, as much as some folks pan the 747-400 as having one undercarriage in the grave, the values for used models has actually increased the past tw
136 Post contains images Flysherwood : Why would I ask someone who believes that a passenger like myself, who is willing and able to pay for business class is going to want to stop in Duba
137 Jacobin777 : ...given recent sales of the B773ER, I think I would disagree with you on it....the A350 has sold well lately, but Airbus practically sold no A345/A3
138 Post contains images Stitch : Then Concorde must be proof of the sheer idiocy of British and French aerospace... I was proud and excited to work on Sonic Cruiser. I wish the marke
139 BoomBoom : Airbus dropped their VLA forecast in recent years and launched the A350. Really silly argument; even by your standards... Nothing like the A380 disas
140 ER757 : And many more operated the 747 only to come to the same conclusion after the fact. Witness AA, DL, EA, OA, IE AZ to name a few. My guess is that will
141 Poitin : Even more fun is the two year comparison of EADS stock price to Boeing. You might try posting that one Boom-boom. I don't have a image server like yo
142 Khobar : Dunno why you were thinking 787 - it doesn't have a hump, long or otherwise.
143 Astuteman : Anyone who thinks that the A380 won't become a readily recognisable, possible even iconic aircraft, is kidding themselves. Sorry. Regards
144 Gbfra : Maybe, but the Concorde flew while the Sonic Cruiser never saw the light of day. Ah yes, those terrible market forces. It is, even in hindsight, diff
145 XT6Wagon : Airbus has a couple hundred quotes on the 787 alone that make them sound like complete retards running a hot-dog stand across the street from another
146 Post contains links EI321 : Wow. Same shit, different day. Another Airbus thread dragged off topic. Another recent article: http://www.kansas.com/101/story/140169.html This is on
147 Post contains images Stitch : Maybe, but the Concorde flew while the Sonic Cruiser never saw the light of day. And I am sure British and French taxpayers regret that. And if the m
148 Tdscanuck : How is 10 flag carriers most of them? Of the repeat orders, only Emirates and Qatar were actually followup orders (all the rest were option conversio
149 Poitin : Why? Mr. Dixon is making a number of assumptions: 1) the A 350-1000 will do all Airbus promises. 2) that Boeing is not going to react with a lighter
150 Post contains images Keesje : Funny how every a380 order since it inception is downplayed here on a.net. Because it was only an Emirates order, an order from an Airbus countries,
151 EI321 : And theres something strange about this? For example, was the 787 given design freeze in May 04? It was still the shark plane back then but that did
152 Tdscanuck : Those are the claims. The question is whether Airbus can achieve it. The A350 will almost certainly have more efficienc engines, given that they're g
153 Post contains images Stitch : 6) That QF actually has a mission for this type of aircraft... I do not think Boeing will work too hard to improve the 777, but instead just try and
154 Khobar : Why leave nonsense to others when you are a master of it? Obviously my humour escaped you. For that I apologize. However, I take issue with your cont
155 DrExotica : Count me in that group then Astuteman. The A380 is in no way as historically significant as the 747. Try reading some aviation history to put it in b
156 Post contains images Keesje : I sense some strong believes and convictions here that are based on some general sentiments here on a.net. You can say anything on Boeing here on a.n
157 TKV : I do not see that the reasonable question by Flysherwood has been responded here. I agree. But will it be competitive and profitable ?? I assume that
158 Post contains links BoomBoom : That's just a rehash of the Dominic Gates article we've already discussed in another thread, a thread which you posted in. Seattle PI: Airbus A350 Mu
159 Post contains images NAV20 : Of course you can, Keesje. That's how it should be on a discussion forum. Of course you're entitled to say that too. But, looking back over the last
160 Post contains images Flysherwood : Actually it may become to be known as the second flying pachyderm (white) after Dumbo!
161 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ..I guess we can agree to disagree on this point , but besides its sheer size, the A380 doesn't offer anything "distinctive" (unless one regards the
162 Post contains images Flysherwood : Which aircraft would that be Keesje?!?!
163 Post contains links Tdscanuck : What's pathetic about looking at the actual order book? Take a look at the actual orders: http://www.myaviation.net/webimages/?pid=00001091 A380 is r
164 Post contains images Astuteman : What the hell has any of that to do with "recognisable by the travelling public"? As for your guess as to what the public will make of its looks - yo
165 EI321 : I think he's comparing either the A320 & 737-300. The Airbus was launched a few years later than the boeing (1980 & 1982).
166 Post contains images EA772LR : I couldn't agree more Stitch. This is EXACTLY what I was thinking. Many airlines who have ordered the 77W/L won't even receive these planes for years
167 BoomBoom : Don't get so emotional. It's only a machine...
168 GRIVely : Keesje, I have read your numerous posts in support of the A380 with interest and noted how clearly your enthusiasm comes through. Given the questions
169 Post contains links EI321 : Quoting Stitch (Reply 153): If I was running Boeing, I'd introduce the 787-10 with a 275t MTOW and existing engines by 2013. I think this is exactly w
170 Post contains images EA772LR : C'mon Keesje. It's just planes we're talking about here. We're all the same, just a bunch aviation enthusiasts!!
171 Post contains images Flysherwood : So that would be akin to comparing something like the 787 to the A300? or the 787 to the A330?
172 EI321 : Not sure why you would use those examples. Theres a 32 year gap between the launches of the A300 and 787, and theres a 17 year gap between the launch
173 HawkerCamm : Actually 272t would be enough to carry 290 pax 8500nm or 330 8000nm. However a 6 wheel MLG would be required and this would push MTOW nearer to 275T.
174 EI321 : Definitely. I dont believe that Boeing are serious about putting several billion into the 777. Without the Trent XWB the effect would be moribund any
175 Astuteman : Please accept my apologies, Jacobin. You are not an approriate target for such a comment. Consider it withdrawn. Regards
176 JTR : It seems to me that saying Airbus screwed up going forward on the A380 project touches a few nerves as well. I hope that you can at least admit that
177 Post contains links SunriseValley : Read Widebodyphotogs take on the issue in reply 70 at Aboulafia: A350 Competitive Threat To Boeing (by NYC777 Aug 6 2007 in Civil Aviation) He raises
178 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ..don't throw me in that camp mate (about the ugly part)...I just think its a large plane (for the most part)..but those wings are damn impressive (u
179 Post contains images Baroque : I agree that a high proportion of pax will not even work out it has four engines, the 55% who are not on the top deck or cannot see the stairs will n
180 Post contains links and images HawkerCamm : Why GEnx? RR are developing a new engine in the 87klb to 95klb for the A350XWB. A derivative of this would be good enough. Hey RR could suggest to Be
181 Post contains images Jacobin777 : No apologies needed from you Astuteman, I know you are one of the more classier (as well as having one of the highest integrity) A.netters here......
182 Stitch : It should. The current gear is good for 280t and the wings can take up to 320t with minor strengthening. The engines at 75,000lbs should be plenty to
183 Post contains links HawkerCamm : http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...50-900-xwb-variant-but-doubts.html Baseler says that taking the 787-10 from the “low 7,000nm range category
184 Post contains images Keesje : GRIVely, it would be an early moment IMO. E.g. the final verdict on the 747 wasn´t made in 1975 / 76. In those years Boeing delivered 20-30 747s a y
185 HawkerCamm : Am I misunderstanding your units? By 280t do you mean 280 short tons ie 254011.727kgs or 560,000lbs?
186 Justloveplanes : Interesting point, however let us consider one more possibility: An upgraded GE115. This plus a few other improvements could maybe 1/2 the difference
187 BoomBoom : Hello!, Keesje--It's not 1975/76 anymore. The world has changed! Back in those days there were no ETOPS 767s, A330s and 777s to do long-haul flights
188 Post contains images Stitch : There are many other airlines besides QF and EK in the world, and they may find a 560,000lb 787-10 with 6000nm "real" range loaded with a full cabin
189 DrExotica : Funny guy... Here it is again: 1. 747 is more significant historically than the A380. 2. A380 is not particularly different in general appearance tha
190 Post contains images Keesje : How is it possible to make a verdict on an aircraft that hasn´t even entered service, will remain in production for at least another 25 yrs & has a
191 Baron95 : Except that all you guys are forgeting about production capacity and profit potential. Look at it this way: 1 - Boeing sales and marketing is selling
192 Post contains images BoomBoom : You apparently do, as each post you make becomes more and more unhinged. You seem to have...
193 Flysherwood : I believe we can come to the conclusion that the 787 will be a success even though it has not entered EIS. I believe we can come to the verdict that
194 Khobar : You are here now saying that Boeing and Airbus agree as to the size of the market - they don't. Actually, make that (at least) the third - the 747 wa
195 Justloveplanes : It's far too early to gauge the success of the A380. Markets have surprises. Right now the stampede is to point to point and this should continue with
196 Post contains images ER757 : Great line! ROTFL - Regardless of how well the A380 sells, this is a bit of an exaggeration, Hundreds at any given moment? I think not.
197 Stitch : Considering many long-haul 747 flights depart and arrive within very narrow windows all around the world, it might not be a stretch to imagine that,
198 Lumberton : A380s or 773ERs (or A346s).
199 ER757 : How many 747's do you suppose are in the air at any given moment? I don't know myself, just wondering if you'd hazard a guess. Don't count domestic f
200 Azhobo : I dont know but the two rows of windows running the full length of the fusalage sure make it distinvtive.
201 Post contains images NAV20 : Keesje, unfortunately, on orders so far it doesn't look like being in production much after 2014 or so. EADS' current production intentions are one t
202 Stitch : I wonder if Airbus will actually achieve that rate, not because they can't do it, but because perhaps airlines will want to spread out deliveries mor
203 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ....that sure wouldn't be a model of efficiency though....
204 Poitin : I sort of doubt that they can use the same space that they were using for th A380 for the 350 while still making the A380. They do need all the parts
205 XT6Wagon : Uhm, Keesje, the real problem is that its NOT in service some 10years after they started marketing it to airlines. How well would have the 747 done i
206 Baron95 : I think the forecasts are 750 VLAs (744 and larger) over the next 20 years, give or take a a couple of hundred, with at least a 1/3 beinf frighters.
207 Post contains images WingedMigrator : If by 'quite soon' you mean 2013-14, then yes. While Keesje is perhaps overly enthusiastic about the A380's prospects, his basic point (that you shou
208 Baron95 : That is exactly right. BA is one of the few companies flying VLAs, mid-size and small widebodies on the same routes. They have 747s, 777s, 767s accro
209 NAV20 : We're all guessing, WingedMigrator, because we don't know the delivery dates for the later models. In addition, it looks highly unlikely that Airbus
210 Zeke : The extended length 747 was first marketed to airlines in the 1970s, from when the 747 Advanced was marketed to entering service as the 748-i will be
211 Post contains images WingedMigrator : It will also put tremendous pressure on Airbus to improve the A380. Throw in 'XWB' generation engines and possibly the stretch it was intended for st
212 Post contains images Keesje : If e.g. 500 747s are in operation having a daily utilization of approx. 14 hrs that would have more then 250 in the air worldwide at any moment. I th
213 EI321 : Such silly logic. 787 684 orders, 112 built in first 2 years, 10 per month in year 3, likely 14 per month in year 4. This means the 787 has all slots
214 XT6Wagon : What ARE you talking about? CAN you read? Your blather has nothing to do with anything in my post or Keesje's post. If you can read, you would notice
215 Post contains links and images Keesje : great pic thnx for posting! That might be true. The A380s >500 seat segment is less at risk in that respect.[Edited 2007-08-09 12:21:53]
216 Stitch : I think Boeing say 1000 and airbus 1300. Most freighters will be converted 747(-400). Boeing (and many Air Cargo Industry experts) calculates 30% of
217 Post contains images Lumberton : Very nice assessment of the market in the cargo VLA segment, Stitch.
218 Tdscanuck : How else are you supposed to move objects too long to go in through the cargo door? Granted, there aren't that many cargo's that come in those dimens
219 TKV : Not commenting the reference to 100s crossing poles and oceans, I agree with the scale !! Not so with the efficiency, which already in some months wi
220 Jacobin777 : NAV20, I'm not sure how you come to that conclusion,but if Airbus gets the orders it needs/expects to get (that I'm not so sure will happen), I'm cer
221 Post contains links Keesje : The An124 operators seem to have captured this outsize market. You don't have to lift it to 747 maindeck level out both ends of the flight. http://ww
222 Flysherwood : The number of orders for the 747-8F would dispute your contention.
223 Post contains images Flysherwood : NOBODY wanted it except the two you quoted and Airbus ended up really pissing them off!!!
224 Post contains images WingedMigrator : I'm not sure if you understood my point. There is for all practical purposes no investment required on RR or EA's part to re-engine the A380. The exa
225 EI321 : Nav is suggesting that A380 production will stop in 2014, based on what? Thats what I'm asking. If he's going by the current rate of orders, well its
226 EI321 : Yeah but there is the opportunity cost of sacrificing the GP7200 and Trent 900 investments if they have not payed for themselves by the time they dec
227 WingedMigrator : Nonsense. An engine sold is an engine sold... all the more so if it sells more airplanes.
228 Flysherwood : They could have also been given one hell of a discount on these 6. That would be a very John Leahy move to make a bigger splash at Paris.
229 Post contains links Keesje : There were more orders / upcoming orders but Airbus decided differently: But the freighter version has been "delayed" until at least 2014, with 1,500
230 Post contains images TKV : I think you are answering correctly your own question. I understand that NAV20 is suggesting that if to maintain open the product line after the pres
231 Post contains images Stitch : 747-400 values are on the rise as of late - current value for a 1997-2003 744 is $75 to $105 million (data as of last month). Do you happen to know w
232 Post contains images BoomBoom : Talk about a feel-good story
233 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ....I did understood your point.. I just respectfully disagree with you on this.... ...IIRC, can't recall how much it will cost, but it was still exp
234 Post contains images Stitch : Lucky for the 747 most of the world's cargo facilities already have the nose-door loading infrastructure in place.
235 Justloveplanes : What is the A388F payload at 5000 nm? What range do you refer to for lower volume (do you mean ower density, i.e. express parcels?) Thanks!
236 Stitch : Well that is just 600nm less then her range at max payload, so maybe 151-152t instead of 150t?
237 EI321 : How much is a BCF conversion? True, Im refering to one off lifts for which the Atonov holds a niche.
238 Post contains images Osiris30 : I'm agreeing with Stitch.. the end of the world must be coming Boomboom: agreed. Gbfra: Lesson here: Those that live in glass houses shouldn't throw
239 ZiggyStardust : Even if the exact same engine can be used from the 350, only RR has signed up for it, so EA would need to invest money to provide an upgraded engine.
240 Zeke : I can read, but I am unable to read your mind. If you are unable to express your thoughts in words, do not take it out of people who are left to read
241 Post contains images EI321 : Maybe not what you would like to read, but certainly not 'HORRIBLE'. Er, your contradicting what you said just one sentance earlier, one is a clean s
242 Tdscanuck : What are they going to learn in 6 months that they wouldn't already know from the flight test program? Flight test will nail down all of the true per
243 EI321 : As of now, correct. However its ineviatable that GE or EA will move on the A350 eventually. any possible A380 engine change wont happen before 2016 s
244 EI321 : They might not learn much in terms of performance figures, but they will get to see in service performance, dispatch reliability, etc. That has been
245 HawkerCamm : That should not make. Trent 900 and GP7200 evolutionary technology went into the Trent XWB. If RR are able to put the Trent XWB onto the A380 they wi
246 Osiris30 : No I'm not contradicting myself. I was being sarcastic (which was apparently lost on you). My point was that gee, a clean sheet design beat a design
247 Post contains images Stitch : That I would like to know, myself. In the report on the proposed A343 passenger to freighter conversion program, the cost of the conversion was expec
248 TKV : Notice that myself stated that 6 months is not enough, see [ And I did not refer to data available from flight test (I assumed that you did neither i
249 Keesje : do ILFC, Emirates ring a bell?
250 Justloveplanes : I am quite the novice at the following calculations, but i'd like to take a shot as this is a very interesting comparison. Boeing's website says a ma
251 XT6Wagon : so anyone want to comment on two customers that canceled thier A380F one of which picked up 748F instead? ILFC kicked the A380F to the curb, and EK di
252 SEPilot : I don't know what Randy said about it, but if I were running a general freight operation the thought of loading a double deck freighter would give me
253 TKV : May I remind my reply to you: As you may notice, even if QF and SIA are not in N.AM, Europe nor Japan I included them as they can be considered estab
254 Post contains links Tdscanuck : It's in the range/payload charts: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/airports/acaps/7478brochure.pdf Take a look at Pg. 13. Range with 140t payload (~2
255 Post contains images EI321 : Wasn't that massive order for two A380F from emirates converted into ........ two more A380s? Nobody can deny that the 747-8F is a great 747-400F / 7
256 Wsp : The 45 aircraft in 2010 have been mentioned in the revised production plan as part of the procedure to work off the backlog that was created by the d
257 Osiris30 : Nice try and dodging THE ENTIRE point of what I was saying.. but I'll simplify for you since apparently subtlty is NOT one of your finer points.. the
258 EI321 : No but 45 p.a. up until the cycle peak would be coherent with both Boeing and Airbus's VLA market forcasts.[Edited 2007-08-09 23:36:19]
259 EI321 : Because as usual that little bit on info is abstracted. The A380 was launched in 2000. Looking at my fingers, thats one-two-three-four-five-six-seven
260 Stitch : Grr... I meant to say that I believe the lack of a nose door WILL NOT be a significant reason why the A388F has yet to sell to the world's major carg
261 TKV : Well, I am not so sure: when they ordered the A380F, there were no B748i nor B777F, and as long Airbus did not provide a cause for cancelling, FEDEX
262 Post contains links and images Keesje : Keep the legend alive. Airbus postphoned the A380 for years because they needed the 1500 engineers for the passenger aircraft. Airbus said it publicl
263 Post contains images Stitch : Keesje referred to Randy's blog directly above (thanks!). Very true, but so far, nobody wants to fly from ANC to all over China, Europe, India and th
264 EI321 : I often wonder why Airbus even bothered with an A380F. The nose door might be a disadvantage, but its nothing compared to the upper deck loading issu
265 Stitch : I honestly think they felt the ability to fly 1000+nm farther would have been a selling point big enough to convince cargo carriers to open new cargo
266 Post contains images Thebry : Actually that's two words
267 Post contains images Stitch : I'll give you half-credit. Some of the Sonic Cruiser's materials technology was applied to the 7E7/787, but nothing like the relationship between the
268 BoomBoom : The A380F simply doesn't come close in orders. The sales numbers tell you very clearly which is the more capable aircraft. 748F=65 A380F=ZERO
269 Osiris30 : Ok, fair enough, as I'm not interested in spreading intentional misinformation I'm going to plead guilty to mucking up the timeframes.. Therefore, pl
270 TKV : The first B777F was ordered by Air France 5/2005. I do not think UPS ordered the A380F End 2005 !! Can you check this ?? TKV
271 Post contains links NAV20 : No, E1321, obviously they didn't 'plan' the delays or the cost overruns. But the fact that the programme was 'financially dodgy' was known from very
272 Shenzhen : How many orders would the 747-8F have if it was available ove the same time period as the A380F?? 150-200?? Cheers
273 Stitch : But is that really fair? Events outside Boeing's control made the Sonic Cruiser fiscally irrelevant and they happened early enough along that Boeing
274 Post contains links Poitin : The A 380 is purely a creation of Noël Forgeard who shoved it through even though both Boeing and MD had both offered similiar aircraft and both com
275 Osiris30 : Honestly Stitch, I'm not sure it is fair.. much as I'm not sure a lot of what we say on here is 100% fair. I do know that Airbus could likely have st
276 Post contains images Stitch : Again, is that fair? (Sakes, I sound like an ad for FOX News. ) The A3XX was an all-new design. So was the MD-12, but I'm not sure in how much in reg
277 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ..what's interesting to read about that article is to know what has and hasn't panned out over the past few years.....thanks for the link..
278 Post contains links NAV20 : Arguably it's not entirely fair. Forgeard was probably only doing what he was told to do by the people who set up EADS; particularly the late Jean-Lu
279 Post contains images Astuteman : Be interesting to see if they return to the fold when the A388F becomes available again..... I'm not sure how this can be inferred from an article wh
280 Post contains links and images Poitin : I think you answer your own question -- yes, it is a fair appraisal of the market the A 380 was facing as far as 500 plus seat airplanes are concerne
281 WingedMigrator : A new VLA needed to be cast just beyond the reach of the 747, or Boeing could easily squash it. (As it turned out, the A380 wasn't quite far enough o
282 Keesje : And it wasn´t / isn't possible too with existing freighters.. - A300 first wide body twin, best medium cargo aircraft, selling for 35 yrs. - A310 fi
283 EI321 : MDD was in no position to launch the MD12. Their entire range was going down the toilet.
284 Baroque : I imagine something like an A380-880R with newer engines is the notional benchmark against which QF keep saying niet to all the would be Syd-Lhr non-
285 Stitch : But then we get into the "chicken and the egg" issue, Keesje. It is more then just buying A388Fs. You then must build new cargo facilities and these
286 Poitin : Or, which is more likely given the down sizing of the airline fleet, the A380 was too big. They should have built the A 350 XWB sized airplane instea
287 Brendows : Not only a shorter main deck, it has a lower deck height for both decks. It does happen, as do Airbus with the A380. Heck, both are giving deep disco
288 EI321 : You dont nessessarily need new facilitys, the A380 carries standard cargo containers. You do need new equipment. Thats makes sense, in theory, but ca
289 Post contains images Stitch : I don't think that high, but all the 744Fs and 744ERFs sold during that time would have instead been 748Fs. Not only a shorter main deck, it has a lo
290 TKV : Let me ask some dumb questions: 1) To attain such notional benchmark status is it enough to install newer engines ?? Are there no other parameter inv
291 Post contains images Astuteman : We may see this "beast" yet... Regards
292 Stitch : Some pax will be bled from the trunk routes, but there is still a great deal of O&D traffic between cities like LHR and SYD and HKG and YVR. And fact
293 Post contains images Revelation : I think Airbus is listening to their customers: the ones who've ordered A380 seem to be quite anxious to get it. However, I think they didn't listen
294 Keesje : Yes it is.. Again there is no equipment that can do the job. It is like saying Europe - Australia non-stop is no market because no operators fly it.
295 Poitin : So, where's the aluminum A350 in the above list? That is a 777 sized aircraft, which by then had already converted AA from 747s to 777s. The facts we
296 SEPilot : It is true that nonstop flights improve utilization and speed transit times, but carrying the extra fuel to do it uses much more fuel in the process.
297 EI321 : It was launched purely as a response to the 787. There was no 787 when the A380 was conceived. There wasn't even the sonic cruiser proposal yet. And
298 Post contains links Brendows : Yes it is.. 133991kg vs. 151440kg for the 747-8F and A388F respectively, is that really such a great gap in terms of payload? I would agree if you co
299 Poitin : That must explain why Airbus sold so many 340s -- less than half of the 777 (about 420 verses nearly 1000) and if you look at this years sales alone
300 TKV : True. But on the other side, they avoid the extra fuel spent during the landing and take off on the hub, all the hub airport related costs. the addit
301 Post contains links and images Zeke : You are only looking at sectors less than 4500 nm....
302 EI321 : Take away the 777F, 773A and 772A if you want to compare like with like. Then compare the remainder from the years 1997 - 1999 and you will see why t
303 Poitin : Right, sure, what ever you say. The number of 340s sold is the number of 340s sold, just as the 777. If you want to split hares, you got to catch the
304 TKV : This is an extreme example. But anyway: nobody is denying that in some cases the A380 is the best solution, but statistically speaking, it seems ther
305 Stitch : This is an extreme example. Actually, it isn't. Check departures from the US East Coast to Europe. Most leave in a very short bank. Same with Asia to
306 Justloveplanes : I don't think the 340 was a bad idea, it was actually a good idea. Basically a major derivative of the A330, designed at the same time as the 330, an
307 Tdscanuck : The Sonic Cruiser and the 787 are a lot closer than you imply. They're basically the same aeroplane in all respects except aerodynamics. Systems, mat
308 Stitch : Even without the SuperFan, I think the A340 was a good idea executed well. Compared to the L-1011, DC-10, MD-11, and 747-200 it was a superior plane
309 TKV : If you compare the fuel consumption only, this is true in many cases. But if you consider all the factors I mention in my quoted reply, this generall
310 Stitch : Okay, are we talking cargo and passengers now? The recent focus of this debate has been the relative merits of the A388F and the 748F, so my comments
311 Brendows : Yes, and I did that on purpose, look at the route structure most cargo operators have today.
312 Poitin : You are absolutely right that two 388s are cheaper than three 77W, but how about 3 787s or 3 350s? Probably about a wash if you have high load factor
313 TKV : Yes. I was speaking of pax. Notice that in my replies 300/304 I mentioned CASM I agree with above, still considering that on super long routes as LHR
314 Poitin : It was a bad idea as history has shown. The A330 is a good airplane but adding two extra engines on it and adding 16 tonnes of weight to make the 340
315 WingedMigrator : So I'm guessing that you're aiming for 10,300 - 10,500 nm still air range If an A380R is built with 'XWB' generation engines, it will carry ~44,500 k
316 Ikramerica : The A340 was a fine idea when launched. The A346 would have been a great idea if it had an EIS of 1996, as there was nothing in the technology that w
317 Post contains images Stitch : Except I don't think Airbus could have easily hung Trent 8104s or Trent 8115s under the wings of an A330...
318 Post contains links Lumberton : BTW, James Wallace's latest blog entry features the Steven Udvar Hazy interview with AWST. The comments from readers sound like one of the better flam
319 Post contains images Astuteman : On that mission, I don't think you'd want any more than 475 pax.... FWIW I think your OEW assumption allows for the little bit of judicious lightenin
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...
NYT: Udvar-Hazy Dislikes American Carriers posted Thu May 10 2007 17:08:16 by Max999
Udvar-Hazy On The 748I posted Mon Mar 26 2007 14:52:29 by 2wingtips
Boeing To Pursue 777-400ER?(Steven Udvar-Hazy) posted Mon Mar 26 2007 14:43:29 by 2wingtips
Udvar-Hazy: Ilfc To Eventually Acquire 100+ 787s posted Sun Mar 18 2007 11:37:41 by 2wingtips
Udvar-Hazy Warns Boeing, Airbus On Rivals posted Wed Mar 14 2007 09:03:54 by Sangas
The Udvar-Hazy Center: Is It Always So Dark Inside posted Fri Feb 23 2007 23:07:27 by Whappeh
Mr Udvar-Hazy "3rd A380 Delay Likely" posted Wed Sep 13 2006 14:43:00 by PanAm_DC10
Udvar-Hazy Comments On A350XWB At Farnborough posted Wed Jul 19 2006 17:38:42 by Leelaw
Udvar-Hazy: Don't Destroy Airbus Over A380 Mistake posted Mon Jun 26 2006 06:48:09 by Leelaw
Spotting At IAD/Udvar-Hazy posted Sun Jun 25 2006 06:23:42 by USPIT10L