Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A Comparison Between A350 MkI And 787  
User currently offlineCarls From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 522 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3126 times:

I have been thinking about how the A350 MkI would holda comparison against the 787. Based on comparisons and statements here at A.Net between the A330 and the 787 I have reach the conclusion that the A330 is and will remain more efficient in flight in between 7 and 9 hours than the 787.
Could be that in either case the A358 and A359 MkI would have been more efficient that their comparable 787?

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6482 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3105 times:

Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
Could be that in either case the A358 and A359 MkI would have been more efficient that their comparable 787?

What are you calling the "Mk. I"? During the time that the non-XWB iterations of the A350 were being heavily debated (and criticized by Udvar-Hazy and the head of SQ), there were four iterations of the A350 that had been identified. The A350 XWB was considered "Mk. V", and the XWB with the revised nose was "Mk. VI." I'm not sure where that puts us now, but "Mk. I" was considered to be the A330-200Lite concept. I suspect that you're referring to what we on this forum were calling "Mk. IV," which was the last A350 with the A300 diameter.

http://www.amtonline.com/article/article.jsp?sitesection=1&id=3030

[Edited 2010-02-16 13:03:44]


When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineea772lr From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3023 times:

Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
Based on comparisons and statements here at A.Net between the A330 and the 787 I have reach the conclusion that the A330 is and will remain more efficient in flight in between 7 and 9 hours than the 787.

I have to disagree with this. I believe a number of 787 customers will be operating their 787s in the 7-9 hour range, and for the A330 to remain more efficient shows a total miss on the 787. Granted the 787 was designed from the start as a much longer ranging airplane, it's lighter, and will burn significantly less fuel/hour. In a comparable configuration, the 788 will seat almost as many in 8 abreast, and more in 9 abreast than the A332. Likewise for the 789 vs. A333. This is nothing against the A330 (I just started a thread on how brilliant the A330 is) rather a testimony to how good I believe the 787 will be. We haven't even seen the numbers from flight testing yet on the 787, (the most overweight one at that). I suspect from ZA100 and on, the 787 will be an exceedingly good airplane. And this is the '1st Generation' at that. Look at how much better the A330 is from its EIS in 1994.

Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
Could be that in either case the A358 and A359 MkI would have been more efficient that their comparable 787?

I guess we'll never know. Probably close at the very least to the 787s. However, the market decided that the A350mk1 wouldn't be as good (technologically speaking anyway). In the end, I suppose that's what matters.



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2822 posts, RR: 42
Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 2926 times:

Quoting Carls (Thread starter):
I have been thinking about how the A350 MkI would holda comparison against the 787. Based on comparisons and statements here at A.Net between the A330 and the 787 I have reach the conclusion that the A330 is and will remain more efficient in flight in between 7 and 9 hours than the 787.

No-one here, except the most die-hard of the Airbus fanboys believe this. Take any discussion of aircraft performance of a unreleased plan with a grain of salt. If the flag of the poster is European, and it's about Boeing, disregard it, same thing for American flags and Airbus.

The original 350 was not competitive.


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6482 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2811 times:

By the way, here's a thread I started a while ago:

What Are The Five A350 Iterations? (by N328KF May 30 2006 in Civil Aviation)

It contains a discussion of some of the various A350 iterations.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
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...
Major Differences Between A350 And 787 posted Tue Sep 12 2006 07:36:45 by Dallasnewark
Aeroflot To Choose Between A350 And 787 Next Week posted Fri Oct 28 2005 11:38:38 by Keesje
A350 And 787 Specification posted Fri Sep 18 2009 12:41:40 by OyKIE
Air France To Decide In 2009 Between A350 Or 787 posted Thu May 22 2008 06:37:55 by Beaucaire
QF's Expansion Weighs A350 And 787-10 posted Mon Feb 4 2008 16:58:13 by Stitch
Saudi Arabian AL : A350 And 787? posted Tue Dec 12 2006 22:30:18 by FCKC
Why Is There A Gap Between The 787-3 And 787-8? posted Tue Sep 19 2006 05:00:13 by JAM747
What's The Diff Between The 787-3 And 787-8? posted Sun Sep 17 2006 04:48:06 by Remcor
Thai Steps Up A350 And 787 Evaluations posted Mon Aug 7 2006 18:08:53 by Leelaw
Lufthansa Not Satisfied With A350 And 787 posted Mon May 8 2006 21:31:40 by Columba