Now, is the design freeze finally done? And does anyone else know if there are another pictures of the final look? I think that maybe the angle and the way the plane is shown makes the nose not look as good as it could.
Finally, is Airbus making their wing for the A350 a lot better than the B787? From what the ad says, it would appear they claim their new wing and flaps are revolutionary? Care anyone to explain that in more detail?
Now I hope Airbus gets this plane more less in track and avoids the embarrassment of the A380 and B787 delays.
TriniA340 From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Nov 2005, 109 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 31226 times:
Sorry, but I think it looks ugly. I had hoped it would look a little nicer than that. I prefer the pics that EK had released. These look different from the Emirates ones, not so? Or is it the angle?. Anyway, it's not looks that matter right, only performance....
NA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 11148 posts, RR: 9
Reply 4, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 31125 times:
The A350 becomes worse and worse. If it comes to aesthetical design issues (not totally unimportant even in aviation), this mediocre thing is clearly inferior to the Dreamliner. In particular the nose is plain ugly. The current A340s/A330s are definitely nicer.
As to the drawing, also qualitywise the worst I´ve seen from Airbus in a long time.
Quoting AustrianZRH (Reply 2): Mostly boring... Another tube with 2 wings, a tail, and two engines under the wings. The planes start to look the same from an E-170 to a B77W...
I fully agree. Bad times for us aviation fans ahead, bad times for spotters, too.
Slz396 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (6 years 10 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 30349 times:
It looks very familiar IMO.
First of all, the typical Airbus style cockpit windows have clearly made it on the A350 too, just have a look at the shape of the side windows for instance.
For the rest, the nose looks just like the EMB170/190 or the 787, but then when each manufacturer goes in search the most aerodynamic nose shape, they are bound to find the same result aren't they?
Seems that is does make sense to come up with a low placed nose (i.e. with the nose tip ex-centric from the center of the fuselage cross section). The Emb 170/190 has it, the A380 has it, the 787 will have it and now also the A350.
When seen in profile these planes all have the same feature: a low placed nose, a long and flat face, a high curved forhead... You can discuss their differences in details, but the times are clearly gone when a plane nose was perfectly symmetrical and bullet shaped like on the 747, the 767, 777 or all the previous Airbus wide bodies.... Interesting to see how some older planes seem to have had it right 20 years ago on this: the ATP or the Bae146 definitely come to mind.
Compare the A350 to this picture of a 'naked' 787: