Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
10-abreast A350 XWB -Airbus Proposal  
User currently offlineAviationbuff From India, joined Mar 2008, 1425 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 18643 times:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...nted-operating-cost-advantage.html

Quote:
Airbus believes its proposed 10-abreast high density seating arrangement for the A350 XWB would offer unparalleled operating efficiency for long-haul aircraft.



Quote:
While Airbus has not disclosed the total number of seats that the various A350 variants could accommodate in a 10-abreast layout, it says that the certificated exit limit for the twinjet will be 440 seats.


[Edited 2008-05-19 05:29:50]

126 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10105 posts, RR: 97
Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 18580 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Aviationbuff (Thread starter):
While Airbus has not disclosed the total number of seats that the various A350 variants could accommodate in a 10-abreast layout, it says that the certificated exit limit for the twinjet will be 440 seats.

Thanks for the link, Aviationbuff.
I must say 440 seats sounds pretty low for the certificated exit limit.
How many seats do the similarly sized Japanese "domestic" 777-300's carry at 10Y?

Quote:
AirAsia X is taking 25 A330-300s configured in a 392-seat layout with economy seating in a nine abreast high-density arrangement which will be flown on one-stop services between Kuala Lumpur, says Stuart.

And the A330-300 is substantially smaller than the A350-1000.....
On an equivalent number of pax/m2, the A350-1000 would carry 486 people....  scratchchin 

Rgds


User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4399 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 18530 times:

440 makes sense for the -800. LTU has 390 seats on the A333, with 8 abreast...

User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12623 posts, RR: 46
Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 18463 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 1):
I must say 440 seats sounds pretty low for the certificated exit limit.

I believe the current capacity limits are based on evacuating 110 pax per door. I think all the pictures I've seen of the A350 show 4 doors, so this seems to fit. IIRC, the 5-door 773 is certified for 550!

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 1):
How many seats do the similarly sized Japanese "domestic" 777-300's carry at 10Y?

NH's domestic 773s have 21J/503Y configuration, while JL's are 62J/410Y (per JP2006/7).



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5569 posts, RR: 36
Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 18457 times:

Sounds terribly cramped. Already a 777 with 10 abreast or a 330/340 with 9 is horrible and unbearable. As I understand a 350 has less cabin width than a 777.

User currently offlineTaromA380 From Romania, joined Sep 2005, 334 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 18458 times:

I guess Airbus wants to steal ANA's ex-783 orders.  Smile

User currently offlineSirtoby From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 382 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 18326 times:



Quoting Burkhard (Reply 2):
LTU has 390 seats on the A333, with 8 abreast...

According the airberlin's website, the A330-300 has 325 seats with some BizClass seats in the front.


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10105 posts, RR: 97
Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 18113 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting ZRH (Reply 4):
Sounds terribly cramped. Already a 777 with 10 abreast or a 330/340 with 9 is horrible and unbearable

The article suggests that space would be equivalent to the 9-abreast A330......

Quote:
a project study is “looking at the option of taking what is the equivalent of an A330 seat when it is configured at nine-abreast to make a 10-abreast A350”, says Airbus’s vice president marketing Colin Stuart.

Rgds


User currently offlineAustrianZRH From Austria, joined Aug 2007, 1389 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 18116 times:

There's just one thing to say:
 crowded   crowded   crowded   crowded 



WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
User currently offlineBeaucaire From Syria, joined Sep 2003, 5252 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 18056 times:

Let's face it-with petrol at 150 $/barril criteria for airtravel will have to change,if one wants to pay affordable tickets .
I'm not particularly looking forward to 10abreast seating,but is has been done in the past-so what !
If the A350 can provide a powerful tool for carriers to make money even at current and futur oil price levels-so be it.
Many aircraft will be deployed in ME/Asia ,where the criteria for transport are somewat determined by Indian workers flying from the Gulf back home .( that's a multi-billion $ market and the very core of Gulf airlines operations )

[Edited 2008-05-19 07:03:42]


Please respect animals - don't eat them...
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4800 posts, RR: 40
Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 17974 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting ZRH (Reply 4):
Sounds terribly cramped. Already a B777 with 10 abreast or an A330/A340 with 9 is horrible and unbearable. As I understand a 350 has less cabin width than a B777.

Yup. This must be terribly cramped. I will always choose a 9 abreast B777 operator (like UA) over a 10 abreast B777 operator (like KLM for example).

I know Air Transat is flying A330's 9 abreast and it must be horrible. I have flown on LH A340-300's and 600's 8 abreast, and that is OK with me. But 9 abreast on an A330-A340 is not an appealing thought.

Only if the distances to be flown with it are short, it could be an "acceptable" solution. But usually the A330-A340 are flown on long(er) distances. So any airliner selecting this option from Airbus will not receive my payment for a flight. I will take my business somewhere else. Just as any airliner selecting the 10 abreast option on the B777 is not going to get any bookings by me.

Kind regards.


User currently offlineTrex8 From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 4786 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 17964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

years ago I'm pretty sure I was on an AF A300 with 9 across seating, it was miserable and it was only London to Paris!

User currently offlineBlueSky1976 From Poland, joined Jul 2004, 1896 posts, RR: 5
Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 17908 times:

ouch...
First 787 Crampliner 3+3+3, now A350 not-so-XWB with 3+4+3...



STOP TERRORRUSSIA!!!
User currently offlineNavion From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1014 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 17836 times:

Flying in an A350 with 10 abreast seating sounds like agony to me. The A350 interior is 10 inches (.254 meters) NARROWER than the 777 interior!! The XWB is not XWB in reality. The 777 is significantly wider. As a matter of fact the XWB is only 5 inches wider than a 787!! I've copied some specs provided by a Swiss contributer to one of Randy's Boeing blogs. I know, I know it's a Boeing blog but it's just facts, not opinions. Here they are:

Let's review the width facts:

The 767 cross section is 16ft 6in (5.03m)
The 767 interior cabin width is 15ft 6in (4.7m)
(to small for pairs of LD3 containers)

The 787 cross section is 18ft 10in (5.74m)
The 787 interior cabin width is 18ft (5.47m)
(wide enough for pairs of LD3 containers)

The 777 cross section is 20ft 4in (6.19m)
The 777 interior cabin width is 19ft 3in (5.86m)
(wide enough for pairs of LD3 containers)

The A330/340 cross-section is 18ft 6in(5.64m)
The A330/340 interior cabin width is 16ft 8in(5.09m)
(wide enough for pairs of LD3 containers)

The original A350 cross-section and interior width
was the same as the A330/340.

The A350XWB cross section is 19ft 5in (5.94m)
The A350XWB interior cabin width is 18ft 5in(5.60m)
(wide enough for pairs of LD3 containers)

So, the A350XWB is only 5in (0.127m) wider inside than the 787, and over 10in (0.254m) thinner inside than the 777 (over an inch per seat in Economy)

Since they clearly state that they are going after the 777 and the 787, the XWB suffix is really hugely misleading.

The link to this article is http://boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2007/08/777.html.

I think this shows a 10 abreast configuration to be a somewhat desperate move to claim super efficiency. Where does it end? Do we stuff 11 abreast in a 777 and retake the title?!


User currently offlineTonystan From Ireland, joined Jan 2006, 1443 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 17803 times:

If this is going to be anything like the EK 777's then all I can say is.....NO WAY AM I GETTING ON ONE OF THOSE IN ECONOMY!


My views are my own and do not reflect any other person or organisation.
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4800 posts, RR: 40
Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 17763 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Navion (Reply 13):
Since they clearly state that they are going after the 777 and the 787, the XWB suffix is really hugely misleading.

That is not entirely correct but I can understand that you feel this way about it. The XWB-suffix refers to the latest A350 design being wider than either the A330-A340 and the B787. It has no reference to the B777 although I admit the A350-XWB targets the B777 market more than the B787 is doing.

Kind regards


User currently offlineJerseyFlyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2007, 642 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 17466 times:

I would expect at least some of EK's and QR's orders to be delivered in this configuration - and maybe a new order for 30 from Air Asia X.

User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5569 posts, RR: 36
Reply 17, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 17387 times:



Quoting Astuteman (Reply 7):
The article suggests that space would be equivalent to the 9-abreast A330......

Yes and this is a "no-go". I would never ever in my life fly a 10 abreast 777 or a 9 abreast 330/340. Even if the flight was free.


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 18, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 17373 times:



Quoting Navion (Reply 13):
The 777 interior cabin width is 19ft 3in (5.86m)



Quoting Navion (Reply 13):
The A350XWB interior cabin width is 18ft 5in(5.60m)



Quoting Navion (Reply 13):
and over 10in (0.254m) thinner inside than the 777 (over an inch per seat in Economy)

Not to nitpick, but there are a few cm missing. The difference is less than 10 inches (24 cm).

Not that it matters much, it still sounds like torture inside a 10 abreast a350!

What would be the difference in seat width between a 9 abreast 787 and a 10 abreast a350? I'm quite curious about this. Might as well throw in a 10 abreast 777.

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 10):
10 abreast B777 operator (like KLM for example).

Of course, only 2 of KL's 777's are 10 abreast (the 77W's). AFAIK there are currently (emphasize currently) no plans to retrofit the 772's to 10 abreast.

Quoting Navion (Reply 13):
Do we stuff 11 abreast in a 777 and retake the title?!

Nah, but 11 abreast in the a380, like they said in the article  duck 

Quoting Tonystan (Reply 14):
NO WAY AM I GETTING ON ONE OF THOSE IN ECONOMY!

Maybe soon our options are a 10 abreast a350, 9 abreast 787, 10 abreast 777 or 11 abreast a380... (in economy that is)  crowded 



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 19, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 17372 times:



Quoting Beaucaire (Reply 9):
Let's face it-with petrol at 150 $/barril criteria for airtravel will have to change,if one wants to pay affordable tickets .
I'm not particularly looking forward to 10abreast seating,but is has been done in the past-so what !
If the A350 can provide a powerful tool for carriers to make money even at current and futur oil price levels-so be it.
Many aircraft will be deployed in ME/Asia ,where the criteria for transport are somewat determined by Indian workers flying from the Gulf back home .( that's a multi-billion $ market and the very core of Gulf airlines operations )

I agree with you Beaucaire, but it sucks it's that way. It seems like the only way to enjoy flying in the future will be for the wealthiest of fliers, because otherwise, for the average Y passenger, the only way they'll be able to fly is in a very uncomfortable, 'no-perks', cattle-car style of flying, and who wants to do that??

Back on topic, I don't think you can fault Airbus for proposing 10 abreast. We all know some airlines have already looked into that, especially with the rise in fuel prices. If they can build a "plastic" twin that can accommodate 10 abreast seating, then kudos for them. That plane's CASM will be unbeatable just as seating in Y will be unbearable  wink . I think Airbus is in a great position with the 350XWB. I will be VERY comfortable at 8 abreast, moderately comfortable at 9 abreast, and can even squeeze 10 abreast if an airline so choses. I think between the A330 (and any updated versions) and the 350XWB, Airbus has a pretty damn tough line of medium-sized wide body jets.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10105 posts, RR: 97
Reply 20, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 17219 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting EA772LR (Reply 19):
Back on topic, I don't think you can fault Airbus for proposing 10 abreast

Indeed not, seeing as how at least some of the A350XWB customer group have been clamouring for 10-abreast capability, Air Asia being one of them.  Smile

Regards


User currently offlineMoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 4003 posts, RR: 4
Reply 21, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 17150 times:

In other news, Airbus is bundling shoehorns with its new products.

User currently offlineZRH From Switzerland, joined Nov 1999, 5569 posts, RR: 36
Reply 22, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 17119 times:



Quoting EA772LR (Reply 19):
I don't think you can fault Airbus for proposing 10 abreast.

Of course not. But the airlines using these sardine cans can't blame the passengers for not flying them.


User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2013 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 16993 times:



Quoting ZRH (Reply 22):
Quoting EA772LR (Reply 19):
I don't think you can fault Airbus for proposing 10 abreast.

Of course not. But the airlines using these sardine cans can't blame the passengers for not flying them.

For the majority of Western passengers (unless they are Kylie sized), the 10 abreast A350XWB would be a definite no no. For many Asian passengers it would work, as a) their disposable income is lower, making price the ket factor, and b) the people are generally smaller, with much narrower shoulders, so the width would be less of a scrunch.

A Chinese relative of mine recently used Air Asia X and was very happy with the flight. He's not wealthy, so the cheaper price of the ticket was a major consideration.



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineAircellist From Canada, joined Oct 2004, 1721 posts, RR: 8
Reply 24, posted (6 years 5 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 16905 times:

Look out for 7-abreast A320s !!!
:-p


25 Astuteman : I must admit I'm not quite so pessimistic. There were always going to be airlines asking for 10-across on this airframe - there have been right from
26 Post contains links EGNR : Maybe Airbus are looking at having the Thompson Solutions seats offered as an option right from the start of A350 production?
27 FlyDreamliner : You can pack an airplane as tight like a sardine can as you want, comfort suffers. Airbus is bringing no new data to the table here. I'll just say tha
28 Flighty : Yes clearly Airbus is looking at Thompson Solutions seats. Horrifyingly, Airbus realized uh-oh, the 777 just became 100% competitive with the 9-abreas
29 LAXDESI : I can see the 10 abreast 350XWB doing well with LCCs on India-Middle East/South East Asia routes. It would seem that 350XWB, with 10 abreast layout,
30 AirbusA6 : Ahhh, those were the days when we could look forward to luxurious 8 abreast 787s. Somehow I suspect it won't be the standard configuration
31 Flighty : But I think they will be Thompson staggered seats. So, they would not be more "cramped" than today's 777 at 9Y. A 787 has plenty of room for 9Y if yo
32 Kaitak : The problem is that with fuel costs as they are, the pressure to pack as many people in as possible will be all the greater and since there's no end i
33 Astuteman : Terrible inflation we have these days....... Tell me you're not a rep. Are these Thompson seats now the new "CFRP"? Rgds
34 FlyingClrs727 : What if that plane had the Thompson Cozy Suites that DL will be installing in their international 767-300ER's and 777's?
35 Flexo : I with my 6'9" of heigth would definitely hate it. But don't forget that most Asians are much smaller than the average European or African descent per
36 EA772LR : Precisely who I had in mind when I typed my last post..... But you know, at approx. 1.7m tall, and weighing in at a crushing 70kg, I don't think I'd
37 DavidkunzVIE : Is the average a.net user really that obese? I've never had a seat width related problem on my four NG 777 legs (3-4-3). The lack of legroom is much m
38 Brilondon : Where would they use such a type? I found they EI A321's quite uncomfortable when I flew them to Ireland earlier this year, I could only imagine what
39 Ikramerica : If Airbus really wanted to create a 10Y aircraft and compete with the 777, they should have actually made their XWB extra wide and made it 777 width+
40 Flighty : No, I'm not anything. But really, the seat-maps of the 767, 777 just got re-drawn. Also the A330, A340, 787. Each got an extra seat of width. Did the
41 Delta763 : There's a reason why the 767 is my favorite aircraft to fly in. The way most airlines configure it, the 767 has the absolute best cabin layout in econ
42 Flighty : Just want to point out that DL is going 8Y in their 767 and 10Y in their 777 next year... They also hold about 30 A330s in their future "NW" division.
43 Ikramerica : Couples have to fly J or sit in the back of the plane where the fuse narrows…
44 Kappel : Isn't DL the only airline so far to go with the Thompson seat? AFAIK the seat arrangement hasn't even been certified yet. I think it's a bit soon to
45 Astuteman : Agree. I think the potential is certainly there, but the "changing the world" claims are a long way from being substantiated yet. Give them time.....
46 Delta763 : Stagger them all you want, it's still a seat designed for a narrower butt. Besides, I regard any seat that keeps me from being side by side with my w
47 Scbriml : Conversation with your travelling partner will not be easy.
48 Lightsaber : As others have already noted, this product is for a few airlines that *will* implement the configuration. Comfy? But its also economical. From the art
49 LAXDESI : [ Well, for most people upper body is wider than their butt; therein lies the advantage of staggered seats. That can be a blessing in disguise.
50 JoeCanuck : I find the Thompson idea intriguing. I've been on EK's 10y and while it isn't ideal, it isn't a complete hell. Staggering the seats would give everyon
51 Lemurs : If the options are to go into debt to get a bigger seat, or not fly at all, I will want to do it. Don't get me wrong, I love flying, and I love flyin
52 LAXDESI : Six across in J (lie flat) seats has been more than adequate for me on TG LAX-BKK flights. Six abreast J on A350 will be even more comfortable than A
53 Viscount724 : KL is 10-abreast only on their 777-300ERs (not many yet delivered). Their 777-200ERs are 9-abreast and I haven't seen any indication that they plan t
54 ZiggyStardust : What will happens to "large" passengers who can't fit in 1 seat? Currently, they can/are forced to buy a second seat, but that won't be possible with
55 WunalaYann : They will be moved to gym class on the 380 I beg to differ. I am an EK frequent flyer, them and their 10-abreast 777 on MEL-SIN-DXB. I am sure they i
56 LAXDESI : You have a point. Seriously though, 16.7" wide seats in staggered layout may just work.
57 Joecanuck : 100% on the distractive properties of AVOD/GROG, and the necessity thereof. Cudos for stating it so eloquently. I've flown EK DXB-Perth direct...owww
58 JetJeanes : Im sure if they put benches in there they could get 1200 people packed in the plane if this is what they are striveing for.
59 WunalaYann : Funny enough my dad really enjoys the MEL-DXB direct on 8-abreast A345. Maybe it's just roomier than the 777 at 10-abreast. I have no hard figures, a
60 Ty134A : Whats the interior cabin width on the ILW and IL9,... would be interesting to know, only to compare...
61 BlueSky1976 : Quite a few customers are waiting for the A350-1000's specifications to be more firm. Once that happens, it is quite possible A350-1000 will win quit
62 Babybus : I thought the A350 idea was good at first, as it might mean more space for people. I didn't realize they just intended to cram more people in the spac
63 Ilyag : Folks, don't forget the 8-abreast 767s used by some European charter operators - don't think that anybody can beat this one in density.
64 JoeCanuck : That's if you want to fly the 'very' friendly skies...
65 Burkhard : Some airlines will go to Y+ 3-3-3 and Y- 3-4-3 . They only can give you what you pay for. And the typical Indian and Pakistani worker needs not much m
66 Parapente : Seats are seats (a cost) - people are money. Just adding seats does not make you money -it costs money. If you believe you want a -say -250 seat plane
67 Hypercott : I flew a 2-3-2 DL 763ER just yesterday CDG->ATL. I just don't see how DL will be able to squeeze a 2-4-2 config into that cabin. Even with the Thomps
68 BestWestern : XWB = xtra wedgedin bottom
69 EA772LR : If these numbers are correct, then how the hell is the 350XWB going to fit 10 abreast????
70 Astuteman : Same way an A330 fits 9-abreast, if the OP article is to be believed.... FWIW, Boeing's 777 characteristics document shows 228" (19ft) armrest-to-arm
71 Aviationbuff : If the assumptions are right then....
72 LAXDESI : Thanks for working out these numbers. It remains to be seen if 16.36"(or somewhere around that) seats in staggered layout can be at least as comforta
73 Astuteman : Late edit to add:- "In 10-abreast configuration". I still think most A350XWB's will be 9-abreast..... Rgds
74 Baroque : How does the room that a 10 abreast A350XWB will not have compare with the extra room that a 6 across A32x does have? Because we know that extra spac
75 Ikramerica : At some point it is. If you can't fit in the seat (16.5") then it certainly is noticeable. But if you are talking 17.5" vs. 17.9" or 18.2" vs. 18.5",
76 Flighty : He was joking, because Airbus commonly states how wonderful the extra width of the A320 is for the pax. How will Airbus explain the narrow conditions
77 EA772LR : Thanks Astuteman as always
78 Astuteman : But you're not a salesman.. The A350XWB would appear to be every bit as capable of 10Y (without Thompson seats) as the A330 is capable of 9Y (without
79 Scbriml : Oh please! A quick comparison of sales shows that both Airbus and Boeing have sold more planes in the first four full months of this year than they h
80 LAXDESI : How much heavier are the Thompson seats relative to the standard economy seats? I ask that keeping in mind potential impact on OEW, and payload/range
81 Flighty : True. But this thread is an example of the impact of Thompson seats. Airbus is spooked about something! What could it be? Airlines require a seat cou
82 Scbriml : They are? Why? If, and I still think it's a big if, this revolution does come to pass, it will have the same effect on Boeing as it does on Airbus, s
83 Observer : An A350 @ 10 abreast is 16.9 ins per seat vs 17.2 on a 777 @ 10. 17.2 is the same as on a 737 3x3. Yuck.
84 Ikramerica : Last Thompson salesman on this forum was much more flagrant, but either way, I'm really getting tired of this sales pitch. It's clearly against the r
85 Astuteman : Airbus aren't "spooked" by anyone over the A350, although as with the A330, I agree we are a long way from seeing the demise of the 773ER, even after
86 Ikramerica : It's 17" on the 777 with 2", so there's no way it's 16.9" on the A350 with 2" armrests. The A350 is not 1" narrower. Even if you shave off .5" per ar
87 Astuteman : That sounds reasonable.... No. I don't think we can necessarily infer this either. The conversation becomes a lot easier with the characteristics doc
88 LAXDESI : Good point. As I see it, Thompson seats can make an A330(9 abreast Y) more attractive relative to 788; Similarly, 777(10 abreast Y) with Thompson sea
89 Jdevora : The staggered layout will allow wider seats because they are putting the armrest behind the next seat. Cheers JD
90 CygnusChicago : Not really. This thread is about an Airbus study that takes the A330 "Y-" seat, and puts a version of it in the A350XWB. Neither Airbus' study nor th
91 Lightsaber : Best quote of the thread. We'll direct them to listen to a briefing by Flighty on the merits of the seats. Oh man... coffee out the nose. Apparently
92 Flighty : Very well! It does not bother me to be alone in stating certain facts. The conspiracy theory part will either be proven right, or not. I clearly labe
93 Ikramerica : Well, there must be a document somewhere from Airbus we can find that is at least as "official" as the Detailed Technical Information that Boeing pro
94 LAXDESI : Flighty, I have enjoyed reading your posts on Thompson seating in Y. I didn't know that Delta was adopting them on some of their aircrafts. I agree.
95 Post contains images Scbriml : Indeed an interesting question. Another is, how easy (or otherwise) is it for the window seat pax to get out? This capture from Thompson's video sugg
96 WunalaYann : Sorry mate, dumb question but where is the window? Which one is the guy stuck on the window side? Sorry. At 10-abreast on EK, I'm used to spilling so
97 Scbriml : No, not a dumb question, I should have clarified. IMHO, it doesn't actually matter if it's the left or right-hand seat, the challenge is the same. Ho
98 Scbriml : It would be naive to think that Airbus didn't expect Boeing to do something with the 777. It would be common sense for Airbus to have a number of pro
99 Parapente : Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 84): They are "spooked" by Boeing. Boeing has "hinted" at a revised 777 It would be naive to think that Airbus didn't expect
100 CygnusChicago : Unfortunately, this is already the case in most Y seats - if you're at the window, your neighbor(s) have to get up first for you to get out.
101 Baroque : I think this was discussed at the time, and apart from drag (what a drag) there was a sort of supposition that going to 10 was not needed. Why that w
102 Post contains links DocLightning : The seat doesn't recline. You recline by leaning to the left. The seat cushion slides forward to make it as if you are reclining. I'm actually pretty
103 Ikramerica : First, the 1000 doesn't EIS until 2015. Second, they have sold 40 of them, so those slots are full. So assuming the A350-1000 is on time, minimally,
104 Flighty : Or, drumroll please... DL / AA's MD-80s.
105 DocLightning : I started with that and then stopped myself... How much longer we gonna have those MD-80's around? Long time, huh? Oh goody! Of course that 2/3 seati
106 Astuteman : I'd be surprised if they were being that complacent.... The 789 has its own technical (read weight) issues to overcome, too. Rgds
107 Flighty : Just working on that will (by now, obviously) fully occupy Boeing's engineering for the next 2 full years. All that 789 work is a prerequisite to any
108 Scbriml : Yes, my typo, I meant 2015. Even with 40 sold, Airbus would likely have kept some production slots reserved so they can offer the incentive of earlyi
109 Ikramerica : I'm talking about the A350-900, the first model. Freeze is one thing, knowing more exactly how close Airbus is to doing what they claim is another. W
110 LAXDESI : I have to concur that 788/9 will turn out to be superior to A358 if most airlines choose to go 9-abreast Y with 787. 787(with a narrower cabin, OEW e
111 Ikramerica : Yes, and the fact that Airbus is basically trying to fight two aircraft with 1, and then taking on the 777 with the other two. The A359 is smartly de
112 Astuteman : I'd be inclined not to compare the 788 with the A358. The A358 is significantly more capable (on spec). (about 2.25M ASM vs about 1.85M ASM) I would
113 EHHO : I was once on a CZ B772 PEK-AMS flight with 10Y, and it was really OK. I'm 181cm tall, and had a slight overweight at that time. It sounds worse than
114 Rwessel : As near as I can tell, the seat bottoms flip up like theater seats, leaving more room to move past them.[Edited 2008-05-21 15:39:00]
115 WunalaYann : Thanks for that. I was under the impression that those seats were sort of shell-like seats in which you could recline without eating up on the space
116 LAXDESI : Given both 789 and 350 are new designs, there is a very high probability that 789 (9-abreast Y) will have a lower fuel burn/cost per average seat mil
117 Ikramerica : I was thinking about them as a team. 789 matches the A358 nicely with more cargo, and has a team mate in the 788, which may have slightly higher CASM
118 WunalaYann : As Airbus can attest with the 350 1st generation... I'm surprised that ConcordeBoy hasn't picked this one up yet. The general A.net consensus about t
119 Ikramerica : It didn't help when fuel prices went way up, but the 77W went from a 7200nm to an 7900nm plane, which wiped out the range and payload advantage the A
120 Post contains links LAXDESI : I posted this on another thread, http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...neral_aviation/read.main/3991709/. http://www.thompsonsolutions.co.uk/ In the
121 TGV : Not tested a 10 abreast config for 777 yet (I am avoidning them at all costs), but a friend of mine (and he is not a frequent traveller, so less pron
122 Baroque : How many generations of Kangaroute do you suppose are needed afore we all evolve into a larger bladdered sub-species Yann? Or is it a case that if a
123 WunalaYann : My parents nickname me "long-range Yann" because I have a big "fuel" tank (bladder, really) and can hold it in for hours on end. But the ultra-dry at
124 Zeke : All the work I have seen from him was for the A350OG (i.e. the upgraded A330), nothing on the XWB versions. Also seem to recall that the weights he w
125 JoeCanuck : A small wing can produce less drag than a larger wing, depending on configuration, especially at speed. As far as I know, (which may not be very far)
126 Post contains links LAXDESI : Try the link below. It shows numbers for A350XWB. http://theaviationspecialist.com/master_lh_mission_dataset.gif As I have said before, if 787 is com
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...
Airbus A350 XWB Question posted Mon Oct 30 2006 15:04:07 by Eaglewarrior
Airbus Rolls Out A350 XWB Design Revisions posted Tue Sep 25 2007 15:47:45 by Carls
FI: Airbus To Ask Board To Approve A350 XWB posted Mon Oct 23 2006 10:21:23 by Leelaw
Airbus Lobbies GE To Offer GEnx For A350 XWB posted Fri Apr 20 2007 12:12:09 by Keesje
Do Some Of BA's LGW B777's Have 10 Abreast In Y? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 04:28:43 by 8herveg
Walsh: BA To Talk To Airbus About A350 XWB posted Mon Dec 4 2006 13:29:52 by Leelaw
Hawaiian Air Delay A350-XWB Purchase posted Fri Jan 18 2008 13:24:51 by PanAm_DC10
Airbus A350 XWB Question posted Mon Oct 30 2006 15:04:07 by Eaglewarrior
FI: Airbus To Ask Board To Approve A350 XWB posted Mon Oct 23 2006 10:21:23 by Leelaw
Yemenia Firms A350 XWB Order (?) posted Fri Oct 19 2007 09:57:14 by Flying-Tiger
Do Some Of BA's LGW B777's Have 10 Abreast In Y? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 04:28:43 by 8herveg
New A350 XWB Cockpit Design Unveiled posted Tue Sep 25 2007 12:44:21 by Bells
Hawaiian Air Delay A350-XWB Purchase posted Fri Jan 18 2008 13:24:51 by PanAm_DC10
Confirmed: Composite Frame On A350 XWB posted Thu Sep 20 2007 11:53:57 by Keesje
Yemenia Firms A350 XWB Order (?) posted Fri Oct 19 2007 09:57:14 by Flying-Tiger
New A350 XWB Cockpit Design Unveiled posted Tue Sep 25 2007 12:44:21 by Bells
Confirmed: Composite Frame On A350 XWB posted Thu Sep 20 2007 11:53:57 by Keesje
Walsh: BA To Talk To Airbus About A350 XWB posted Mon Dec 4 2006 13:29:52 by Leelaw
Airbus A350 XWB Question posted Mon Oct 30 2006 15:04:07 by Eaglewarrior
FI: Airbus To Ask Board To Approve A350 XWB posted Mon Oct 23 2006 10:21:23 by Leelaw
Do Some Of BA's LGW B777's Have 10 Abreast In Y? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 04:28:43 by 8herveg
Hawaiian Air Delay A350-XWB Purchase posted Fri Jan 18 2008 13:24:51 by PanAm_DC10
Yemenia Firms A350 XWB Order (?) posted Fri Oct 19 2007 09:57:14 by Flying-Tiger
New A350 XWB Cockpit Design Unveiled posted Tue Sep 25 2007 12:44:21 by Bells
Confirmed: Composite Frame On A350 XWB posted Thu Sep 20 2007 11:53:57 by Keesje
Airbus Rolls Out A350 XWB Design Revisions posted Tue Sep 25 2007 15:47:45 by Carls
Airbus Lobbies GE To Offer GEnx For A350 XWB posted Fri Apr 20 2007 12:12:09 by Keesje
Walsh: BA To Talk To Airbus About A350 XWB posted Mon Dec 4 2006 13:29:52 by Leelaw
Airbus A350 XWB Question posted Mon Oct 30 2006 15:04:07 by Eaglewarrior
FI: Airbus To Ask Board To Approve A350 XWB posted Mon Oct 23 2006 10:21:23 by Leelaw
Do Some Of BA's LGW B777's Have 10 Abreast In Y? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 04:28:43 by 8herveg
Hawaiian Air Delay A350-XWB Purchase posted Fri Jan 18 2008 13:24:51 by PanAm_DC10
Yemenia Firms A350 XWB Order (?) posted Fri Oct 19 2007 09:57:14 by Flying-Tiger
New A350 XWB Cockpit Design Unveiled posted Tue Sep 25 2007 12:44:21 by Bells
Confirmed: Composite Frame On A350 XWB posted Thu Sep 20 2007 11:53:57 by Keesje
Walsh: BA To Talk To Airbus About A350 XWB posted Mon Dec 4 2006 13:29:52 by Leelaw
Airbus A350 XWB Question posted Mon Oct 30 2006 15:04:07 by Eaglewarrior
FI: Airbus To Ask Board To Approve A350 XWB posted Mon Oct 23 2006 10:21:23 by Leelaw
FI: Airbus To Ask Board To Approve A350 XWB posted Mon Oct 23 2006 10:21:23 by Leelaw
Do Some Of BA's LGW B777's Have 10 Abreast In Y? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 04:28:43 by 8herveg
Do Some Of BA's LGW B777's Have 10 Abreast In Y? posted Sat Feb 23 2008 04:28:43 by 8herveg
Hawaiian Air Delay A350-XWB Purchase posted Fri Jan 18 2008 13:24:51 by PanAm_DC10
Hawaiian Air Delay A350-XWB Purchase posted Fri Jan 18 2008 13:24:51 by PanAm_DC10
Yemenia Firms A350 XWB Order (?) posted Fri Oct 19 2007 09:57:14 by Flying-Tiger
Yemenia Firms A350 XWB Order (?) posted Fri Oct 19 2007 09:57:14 by Flying-Tiger
New A350 XWB Cockpit Design Unveiled posted Tue Sep 25 2007 12:44:21 by Bells
New A350 XWB Cockpit Design Unveiled posted Tue Sep 25 2007 12:44:21 by Bells
Confirmed: Composite Frame On A350 XWB posted Thu Sep 20 2007 11:53:57 by Keesje
Confirmed: Composite Frame On A350 XWB posted Thu Sep 20 2007 11:53:57 by Keesje