Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
CX Orders 30 Airbus A350-900  
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12565 posts, RR: 35
Posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 38174 times:

Rumours on PPRUNE suggest that an order from CX for 30 A350s is imminent.

No info on model (although I'd be surprised to see the 358 included). Information so far is sparse, but the posters appear to be CX crew and seem to know what they're talking about.

Doesn't surprise me in the least if it doesn't happen.

273 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 38244 times:

Cathay said the 787 is to small for them and they like the A350, yrs ago. Looking at their cargo heavy US and Europe flights it's would not be a real surprise.

User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9210 posts, RR: 76
Reply 2, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 38136 times:

CX annual results will be posted by the HKEX around lunch time tomorrow. Those numbers will drive further public announcements, including fleet planning announcements.

The company has made no internal announcements to staff on the nature of the annual results or fleet planning decisions, the comments would be “speculative” until either confirmed or denied by CX.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15812 posts, RR: 27
Reply 3, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 38108 times:

Quoting kaitak (Thread starter):
Doesn't surprise me in the least if it doesn't happen

Wouldn't surprise me if it did either. The -900 would work well for their longer flights, but I think that CX could make great use of the A350-1000 for their intra-Asian network.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 37904 times:

Wouldn't surprise me if CX goes for the A359, after all, the fine boys at Boeing are deluded to think its only the A350-1000 versus some revamped B77W meanwhile the A359 eats the B77E's lunch...

I think Boeing should wait until Airbus sells >1,000 A350 frames to finally decide "we need to do something about the A350"....  

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 3):
but I think that CX could make great use of the A350-1000 for their intra-Asian network.

The B789 would be perfectly suited for that as well..  ...



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15812 posts, RR: 27
Reply 5, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 37840 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
The B789 would be perfectly suited for that as well..

The only problem is if CX (and other airlines) feel they want something bigger.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
Wouldn't surprise me if CX goes for the A359, after all, the fine boys at Boeing are deluded to think its only the A350-1000 versus some revamped B77W meanwhile the A359 eats the B77E's lunch...

The -1000 is the one that has the biggest implications for the 787. The A350-900 is close enough in size to the 787-9 that I think a lot of airlines will cross shop them to replace 777-200s.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 6, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37713 times:

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 5):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
Wouldn't surprise me if CX goes for the A359, after all, the fine boys at Boeing are deluded to think its only the A350-1000 versus some revamped B77W meanwhile the A359 eats the B77E's lunch...

The -1000 is the one that has the biggest implications for the 787. The A350-900 is close enough in size to the 787-9 that I think a lot of airlines will cross shop them to replace 777-200s.

The problem as you mentioned in your first comment is if CX wants something bigger....the A350XWB family offers a nice set of pax ranges....the B787 doesn't....

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 5):
The only problem is if CX (and other airlines) feel they want something bigger.

People can say what they want, can conjecture what they want but the A350 (especially the A359) order book speaks volumes IMHO.



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 7, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37668 times:

A359 and A3510 have been nailed on at CX for ages - just a question whether they go for the 789 as well. I hope they do.

My personal feeling is that 789 would be better for Dragonair, and that the latter could use 788s as well.

[Edited 2010-08-02 12:02:53]


What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4864 posts, RR: 40
Reply 8, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37620 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 7):
A359 and A3510 have been nailed on at CX for ages - just a question whether they go for the 789 as well. I hope they do.


Well, we have to wait and see what they will decide on, and when they will decide on the aircraft of their choice. It would be a very good line-up in my opinion with the B789, A359 and A3510.   Let's hope the rumours hold some serious truth.  .


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31259 posts, RR: 85
Reply 9, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37631 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The 787-9 would work as an A330-300, A340-300 and 777-200 replacement, but the A350 family does offer growth beyond that.

And even if the A350-900 and 787-9 penciled out effectively identical in performance and capabilities for CX, the airline might not want to "sole-source" their fleet with Boeing by adding the 787 to their 777 and 747 fleet. Having Airbus in the mix would not only offer flexibility on multiple fronts, it would leverage CX's investment in Airbus-qualified pilots.

Be interesting to see if CX pursues a dual-track VLA purchase when that RFP comes up. They already have the 747-8F coming, so the 747-8 would fit right in and having both it and the A380-800/A380-900 would again give them "dual OEM" flexibility.


User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 10, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37606 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
Wouldn't surprise me if CX goes for the A359, after all, the fine boys at Boeing are deluded to think its only the A350-1000 versus some revamped B77W meanwhile the A359 eats the B77E's lunch...

Well, the 77W is clearly holding its own against the A350-1000, and will continue to do so for some time. I don't see the order ration between the A350-1000 vs 77W to be much different than what we saw from the A330 vs 787.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
I think Boeing should wait until Airbus sells >1,000 A350 frames to finally decide "we need to do something about the A350"....

I agree. Boeing ought to do something to the 772 size plane. It's obvious they likely won't sell anymore 772, very few 77E, and probably not a lot more 77L. Although the 789 replaces the 772A/77E for most routes, will that be enough to deter 77E operators from deflecting from Boeing?



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4864 posts, RR: 40
Reply 11, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37604 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
They already have the 747-8F coming, so the 747-8 would fit right in and having both it and the A380-800/A380-900 would again give them "dual OEM" flexibility.


That would be an even better (and in my opinion) more beautiful line-up for CX.   But those orders might still be a couple of years away from now. But then again, who knows what CX will do, especially since the world economy seems to be recovering from the GFC.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 12, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37590 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 7):
A359 and A3510 have been nailed on at CX for ages - just a question whether they go for the 789 as well. I hope they do.

My personal feeling is that 789 would be better for Dragonair, and that the latter could use 788s as well.

Sounds about right...the A350-1000 would certainly be a good B773A replacement. The A359/B789 a good B772/A333 replacement (CX has different configurations for their A333's). Not so sure the B788 would work for KA however..  

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 10):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
Wouldn't surprise me if CX goes for the A359, after all, the fine boys at Boeing are deluded to think its only the A350-1000 versus some revamped B77W meanwhile the A359 eats the B77E's lunch...

Well, the 77W is clearly holding its own against the A350-1000, and will continue to do so for some time. I don't see the order ration between the A350-1000 vs 77W to be much different than what we saw from the A330 vs 787.

The point however of my comment was that the A359 has been eating the B77E's lunch (while offering a few more seats than the B77E at a much better CASM) and Boeing haven't even acknowledged it even remotely yet....IMHO..

[Edited 2010-08-02 12:11:51]


"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 7028 posts, RR: 46
Reply 13, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37560 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 12):
Sounds about right...the A350-1000 would certainly be a good B773A replacement.

Tim Clark doesn't agree. The 77W still offers more capacity and range; the question is, can Boeing improve it enough to keep its economics competitive?



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31259 posts, RR: 85
Reply 14, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37522 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

It is interesting that EK appears to be planning to swap 773s with 77Ws. I would have expected the A350-1000 to that that role, but I guess it will become a sort of "super 772/77E" and slot between the A350-900 and the 777-300ER. Might be why they only took a score.

User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15812 posts, RR: 27
Reply 15, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37491 times:

Quoting EA772LR (Reply 10):
Although the 789 replaces the 772A/77E for most routes, will that be enough to deter 77E operators from deflecting from Boeing?

Probably for a lot of airlines, especially airlines that aren't using their 777s for particularly long routes.

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 13):
Tim Clark doesn't agree. The 77W still offers more capacity and range; the question is, can Boeing improve it enough to keep its economics competitive?

I think that the A350-1000 probably can't replace the 77W at Emirates just because it can't go ten wide and an improved 777 will probably have better performance at the extreme end of the payload range charts that EK needs.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4864 posts, RR: 40
Reply 16, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37476 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 13):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 12):
Sounds about right...the A350-1000 would certainly be a good B773A replacement.

Tim Clark doesn't agree


I guess Tim Clark does agree since Jacobin specifically mentions the B773A here and not the B77W.  .


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 17, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37476 times:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 16):
Quoting SEPilot (Reply 13):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 12):
Sounds about right...the A350-1000 would certainly be a good B773A replacement.

Tim Clark doesn't agree


I guess Tim Clark does agree since Jacobin specifically mentions the B773A here and not the B77W. .

Got it..  ... 



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3285 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37450 times:

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 13):
The 77W still offers more capacity and range

Think the reference is to replacing the regional 773's rather than the new long-haul 77W's.



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineElbowRoom From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2008, 180 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37430 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 9):
The 787-9 would work as an A330-300, A340-300 and 777-200 replacement, but the A350 family does offer growth beyond that.

OK, let's talk numbers  

Cabin area:
- A330-300 cabin area: 259.1 sq m
- A340-300 cabin area: 258.8 sq m
- 787-9 cabin area: 257.4 sq m

- 777-200 cabin area: 279.0 sq m
- A350-900 cabin area: 279.3 sq m

Pax seating (3 class):
- A330-300: 295
- A340-300: 295
- 787-9: 250-290

- 777-200: 301
- A350-900: 314

Cargo (LD3 positions):
- A330-300: 32
- A340-300: 32
- 787-9: 36

- 777-200: 32
- A350-900: 36

Seems to me the 787-9 would work as an A330-300 or A340-300 replacement.

The 777-200 replacement is closer to the A350-900.

What do others reckon?

[Edited 2010-08-02 12:30:54 Data from wiki and cabin area from an old A.net thread, but looks plausible]

[Edited 2010-08-02 12:32:19]

[Edited 2010-08-02 12:33:39]

User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 7028 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37375 times:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 16):

I guess Tim Clark does agree since Jacobin specifically mentions the B773A here and not the B77W.

Sorry, I forgot about the 773A. I just have 77W on the brain, I guess.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31259 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 37348 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting ElbowRoom (Reply 19):
OK, let's talk numbers.    

Well Airbus and Boeing use different numbers (Boeing goes with larger premium cabins while Airbus goes with larger Economy cabins) and neither company's numbers reflect what CX actually puts in their current planes for seats.  

Doing some rough calculations, I figure a 787-9 would sea about 19 less than a 777-200 or A350-900 in CX's current two-class, but would offer more seats than the A340-300 and A330-300.


User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 37191 times:

Quoting ElbowRoom (Reply 19):
Seems to me the 787-9 would work as an A330-300 or A340-300 replacement.

It would be interesting to know what (assuming 300 passengers) is the cargo capasity (weight) left on a typical 6000NM flight from HKG, on a hot day, for a A340-300 and 787-9.


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10183 posts, RR: 97
Reply 23, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 37121 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
I would have expected the A350-1000 to that that role, but I guess it will become a sort of "super 772/77E" and slot between the A350-900 and the 777-300ER. Might be why they only took a score.

That said, I'd be surprised (astonished in fact) if EK didn't have the ability to "flex" between models built in to such a large contract...

Rgds


User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15812 posts, RR: 27
Reply 24, posted (4 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 37115 times:

Quoting ElbowRoom (Reply 19):
Seems to me the 787-9 would work as an A330-300 or A340-300 replacement

...and some airlines have been looking at or using A330-300s as 777-200 replacements on shorter flights, so make of that what you will.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
25 scbriml : What people have to remember is that EK is different. They always want bigger, longer-range planes. They want a bigger A380, they want bigger or more
26 AirbusA6 : EK's economics are different, as they have always fitted 10Y in their 777s, so their 10Y 77W is usefully bigger in capacity at the back than a 9Y A35
27 BMI727 : Which is why I don't think Boeing can get away with just offering a 777NG. I think they need a 787-10 as well. In the future, the 777NG will probably
28 PVG : What are the plans for Dragonair's fleet replacement? Some of their equipment is getting long in the tooth and their premium product lags in my opini
29 Jacobin777 : I figured that's probably what it is but again, as I previously stated, the A359's order book (and its relative size in relation to the B77E) speaks
30 Post contains images BoeEngr : Resources. With the 747-8, 787-8, and 787-9 programs all in full swing, there is no way Boeing could have done anything to counter it as of yet. If w
31 PM : Last week Stitch noted that John Leahy claims to have 90 firm orders for the -1000 (against 75 announced so far). I have to wonder if Cathay may turn
32 Jacobin777 : As you know being the total and complete Boeing kool-aider that I am, I would love to see a Boeing plane which can rival that of the A359, but even i
33 Post contains images PM : It's also going to look stunning!
34 BMI727 : I think that the best thing Boeing can do against the A350-900 is to bracket it in terms of size. At the lower end, have the 787-9 that will be just
35 Post contains images Jacobin777 : That would be a good move as well, but the -10 would need some rework-possibly including but not limited to a larger wing, a possible 6-wheel bogey (
36 BMI727 : They could do a simple stretch, but I don't think that is the right option. I think that Boeing should modify the existing wing and see where that ge
37 Post contains images Jacobin777 : I think the added landing gear might add to the complexity...however I do agree a simple stretch won't cut it...Boeing has has been on record stating
38 kaitak : 787s have been rumoured for KA, in the same PPRUNE thread ("Fragrant Harbour" section) that spoke of the A350 order; CX is to announce its half year
39 zeke : The CX staff breifing is at 14:00 local.
40 CX flyboy : Results are announced tomorrow...(Wednesday) with staff briefings to be held on thursday.
41 zeke : Correct, I was out by a day, 4pm down at Admiralty, thought it was Tuesday yesterday !!
42 LAXDESI : From the Cathay website: Aircraft.........Long Haul........Regional B773/ER...........16...................12 B772..................0.................
43 behramjee : 789 is too small to replace CXs A 333s and B 772As. A 359 is the best candidate for this aircraft capacity segment.
44 LAXDESI : A333 and B789 have about the same cabin area, and for most regional configurations I expect the B789 to seat more passengers due to its 9 abreast pla
45 Post contains images PM : Cathay fly the very first A330 (line number 12 built in 1992) though they only started taking delivery of the type in 1996. They have taken new A330s
46 behramjee : I think more A 333s were ordered to replace the 5 B 772As as well for the interim. CX have been un-successful at finding any buyers for their B 772As.
47 CHRISBA777ER : That would make AI the only operator on the planet to operate a fleet of 777s with all three engine choices, as the CX birds have the Roller donks. I
48 SEPilot : There is always the chance that they cannot afford new birds, but could afford used ones, especially as demand for 777A's seems to be about as high a
49 LAXDESI : Do any charters operate 777A?
50 SEPilot : I don't know; but the other option if enough of them become available at the right price is freighter conversion.
51 Stitch : The 787-9 should be able to work with CX as an A330-300, A340-300 and 777-200 replacement when you look at what CX currently puts in the planes and ex
52 BMI727 : I half agree. I think that if they go with the A350 for regional routes, there isn't much of a reason for them to go with any 787s. If they order the
53 LAXDESI : A359 does have the capability to replace all of CX's A333/A343/B772 LH and regional aircraft except for the 773A regionals, for which A350-1000 would
54 Post contains images PM : No. Just 88 were built and they are almost all still flying with the nine airlines who originally ordered them. Air India (1) and Transaero (2) have
55 Stitch : Design range estimates with a 68t payload from Boeing are for around 4600km for models with a 247t MTOW, which would be about 1000km less than a DC-1
56 Jacobin777 : I think CX like many other carriers prefer to have both manufacturers to supply its planes....I wouldn't be surprised to see the A359/1000/B789 along
57 Post contains links zeke : and range aparently from Tony Tyler (CX CEO) On CX Fleet Plans, No A380 Yet (by Lutfi Jul 30 2009 in Civil Aviation) CX has two 772 from memory which
58 CX flyboy : All four of Cathay's original order 772As have the small cargo door. B-HNL, the 'new' addition which was the ex-Boeing test aircraft has the large ca
59 zeke : No, I would think it would happen when the need to go north for major check, do the interior at that time as it would have been removed for the check
60 Post contains links zeke : The order is now offical Posted on the HKEX at 12:56 local time http://www.hkexnews.hk/listedco/list...s/sehk/20100804/LTN20100804258.pdf
61 musapapaya : Well done, it is very very nice to see a new order for A350! regards musapapaya
62 Post contains images Jacobin777 : At least there are 6 B77W's to the order as well (exercise purchase rights actually)....... Once again, while Boeing will be happy for the additional
63 behramjee : I expect another major A 359 order down the road because currently CX has 45 A 333s (14 are Dragonair) + 5 B 772As + 11 A 343s which totals 61 aircraf
64 BMI727 : Well, with nearly 200 orders for the 787-9, it isn't that pressing of an issue for them. The A350 that Boeing really needs to worry about is the -100
65 Stitch : They could replace them with 777-300ERs, as EK looks to be doing with their 777-300 replacement, though the A350-1000's smaller capacity might be pla
66 Jacobin777 : "Isn't that pressing"? Boeing has NO solutions to the A359 (at least what's known-besides a potential -10).....its cleaning up house....the A359 has
67 LAXDESI : Presumably the options would include some A351 or conversion rights from A359.
68 CX flyboy : The intention is to have two seating configurations for the 77Ws. Ones coming further in the future (Exactly when is undecided) will not have a First
69 BMI727 : A 787-10 would be larger than the A350-900, and actually be closer in capacity to the A350-1000 though it would probably give up some payload range c
70 LAXDESI : B789 in a 2 class configuration is a near 1:1 replacement for B772E(9 abreast). It would be interesting to look at what orders have been placed by ex
71 MillwallSean : Getting an order from a carrier like CX is always a big feather in the hat for any manufacturer. Congrats to Airbus. A prestige carrier that signs up
72 Post contains links and images scouseflyer : It's on flightglobal now too http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...urchase-30-a350s-and-six-777s.html Couple of interesting quotes from the article:
73 Post contains links kaitak : http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-0...ome-beating-analyst-estimates.html Told you so! Thirty A359s, six 77Ws - and US$881m in half year profits.
74 kaitak : That's probably HK dollars.
75 astuteman : I think Jacobin's point is that the A350-900 already has some 270 orders, 300 when CX's LOI is confirmed, and came to the market substantially later
76 BoeingVista : Another 16 odd (including spares) uncontested engines orders for GE, good business But Another 70 odd (including spares) uncontested engines orders fo
77 Stitch : It's a misquote. CX's statement states the figure is worth $4.5 million USD.
78 PM : With all due respect to EK's order for 32 more A380s, this is the most important order of the year so far. Cathay is one of the most respected airline
79 scouseflyer : That makes much more sense! Thanks
80 Post contains images frigatebird : Thanks for the news Zeke Very good order for Airbus, 30x A350-900 is quite something. As many posters have said, this aircraft seems to be a perfect
81 BMI727 : Part of that might have to do with the A350-900 being the lead variant. I think that the 787-9 will pick up considerable steam the way the 777-300ER
82 LAXDESI : As per the flightglobal article, delivery will be between 2016 and 2019, and it will be deployed both to NA and Europe. CX expects the order to fuel f
83 Post contains images astuteman : I'm not sure I understand why this should matter.. both the A350-900 and the 787-9 will enter service in 2013, so availability is about the same Ah.
84 Post contains images oykie : Yup. Nice to see Cathay and Airbus confirming your rumors Anyway. Congratulations to both Airbus and Cathay. Have anyone seen any pictures of the CX
85 BMI727 : Mainly, when A350-900s start rolling off the line they won't have to compete with other variants for spots on the production line. The 787-9 won't ha
86 Jack : Is it possible that Cathay won't replace the 747 with a VLA, instead move the 773W up into that role and use the A350 family for everything else, incl
87 BMI727 : I suppose it is possible, but not necessarily likely. The chances would increase quite a bit if Boeing goes ahead with a 777NG that would be a true t
88 LAXDESI : It's too early to declare one to be more successful than the other. A359 has some large orders from ME carriers that skew the numbers in its favor. I
89 BMI727 : Is Boeing really going to be able to make an announcement about that so soon?
90 LAXDESI : Perhaps I mixed that up with B737 announcement that Boeing has been promising by the year end. Since the order book for A350-1000 is still very thin,
91 BMI727 : I'm still thinking that Boeing may want to do the 777 in stages rather than an all at once NG rollout. It might screw up resale values, and incur som
92 Asiaflyer : Congrats to CX and Airbus to a great order. I am not surprised that CX went for A350 family rather than B787 family. With a fast growing travelmarket
93 Post contains images CHRISBA777ER : I was told it would be announced at Farnborough - was gutted when they didnt! Good that it is out in the open now. A fantastic A359 order. And now fo
94 Post contains images AustrianZRH : Let's hope it gets firm - right now it's only an LoI. There are still unconfirmed A350-LoIs and MoUs flying around from as early as 2006 which probab
95 PM : Is Qantas still interested?
96 Post contains images astuteman : A350-800's start to roll off the line around frame #20, so I don't see that being particuarly significant I can see some changing to the -1000 somewh
97 keesje : I agree with Jacobin, the 787-9 does not have the bigger wing engines and I do not expect miracles regarding payload range, it is optimized for a sli
98 Post contains links PM : With regard to this ongoing question, I read the following recently. "Now, the A350XWB-900 thrust requirement has grown to 83,000 pounds. “My engin
99 BMI727 : Well, I'm just looking at the numbers, and the manufacturers project that the range of the two will be nearly identical. Other than the 30 for Qatar
100 CXB77L : Yes, but CX also has some newer A333s which do not require immediate replacement. I would expect these A359s to replace the B772, A343 and the 12 old
101 Post contains images Chiad : He he .. PM is quite pleased that RR has the A350 all to themselves! Anyway ... if the order comes firm there'll be a total of 565 A350's ordered, in
102 Post contains images frigatebird : You keep bringing this up, but there are differences between the 789 and the A359: Consequently, the 789 doesn't have to have same wing area and thru
103 328JET : Wow, just two days offline and i see one of the most important fleet decisions! The A350-900 will gain a lot of additional sales in the next 12 month
104 justloveplanes : There are areas that the A359 will excel, as will Airbus over Boeing and vice versa. It's not realistic to expect Boeing to be dominant across the en
105 Post contains images PM : Look, I'm no expert but I'm going to stick my neck out here. I'd say that 565 A350s will require 1,130 engines + spares. But I could be wrong. $ x sq
106 Revelation : Indeed but Boeing has 672 orders for the 787-8 vs 166 for A350XWB-800. You can't win them all. And 191 orders for the 787-9 vs 300 for A350XWB-900 is
107 Post contains images astuteman : All the answer I'll ever need, my friend Remember the original 787 ads - 8500 NM all across the board? It's not exactly as if their line up is a weak
108 Post contains images Baroque : Pleased as PM might be, I will wager it is not near as pleased as RR themselves are. The most "interestinK" (sic from Laugh in) part of PMs post was
109 PM : I think you are confusing engineering talent and production resources. I think you are confusing engineering talent and production resources. Oh, I d
110 BoeEngr : Congratulations to Airbus, Boeing, and CX for the order! So great to see airlines ordering planes again, from either manufacturer.
111 Swallow : Tony Tyler was interviewed on CNN (World Business Today) about the 350 order. Excerpts: -CX evaluated both the 789 and 359 and negotiated with both ma
112 CHRISBA777ER : Read - The CURRENT A388 was modeled. Launch the A389 and watch CX bite Airbus' arm off for it.
113 Post contains images Swallow : Sadly the plate is full at Airbus, so we have to wait a while for Big Momma II
114 Post contains images EA772LR : Thanks for running the numbers. I forgot just how close the 789 was to the A333/A343. Not to mention, more cargo as well. Not really. Did you see GE'
115 keesje : I agree. Similar to BA, stating you're not sure if you need the product anyway helps negotiations if there's no competition.
116 jfk777 : Cathay does fly multiple times daily to teh far reaches of its sytem, LAX, LHR, JFK and SFO all get from 2 to 4 daily flights. Flying some 77W's with
117 astuteman : Although around 600 A330's have also been sold alongside the A350's since the 787 was launched, peaking at 198 in 2007.... Rgds
118 CFBFrame : The 787-9 was smacked with this order!!! Boeing has nothing in the 77E space and they better do something. Now, as I've said so many times the -1000
119 redflyer : According to Tony Tyler's quote - They have modeled the 380 in the CX network and found that the 77W is more profitable - it would appear that Airbus
120 justloveplanes : I think this is a knee jerk response. The A359 is an an advanced design and a very good fit for CX and it won the order. 789 is a bit smaller and lig
121 PlanesNTrains : True or not, money talks, and CX put more money on the 77W. However, everyone seems convinced that the A380-900 will be the CX choice, so I guess we'
122 Post contains links and images keesje : Cathay was looking high payload from hot airfield and real long flights to the US and Europe. The A359 seems better suited for that. A little more of
123 A342 : When LH or IB placed add-on orders for the A346, was that a smack for the 77W? And availability might have played a significant role here, just like
124 328JET : @ redflyer Neither has the A388 a sales problems, nor has the A350-1000 not been accepted by the market. The A388 has outsold its nearest competitor b
125 Post contains images EA772LR : Thanks for the great image Keesje. I've been wanting to see how all these models stacked up. Nice. To all who keep claiming Boeing screwed up in not
126 BMI727 : Hurry up and launch a 777-400 to hopefully take a bite out of A380 sales. I don't think so. They probably might as well stick with the A350 in variou
127 Revelation : Noting the use of the word "somwhat", feel free to unconfuse me... So does Airbus feel bad in losing business when a customer orders both 777 and A33
128 Stitch : Has Airbus revised their numbers? Last I heard, the 787-9 was projected to fly 150nm farther than the A350-900 - 8150nm vs. 8000nm. But they didn't s
129 zeke : I have read almost everything in the electronic press regarding this order, and what has been distributed to all CX staff internally. I see no basis
130 frigatebird : That could very well happen, but the reality is that the A389 doesn't exist (yet). Neither do the 787-10 or the 777NG, so it's pointless to speculate
131 astuteman : As far as I'm aware, Stitch, only you have modified the numbers..... Whatever it's projections, the 787-9's spec with 290 pax is 8 000Nm. The A350-90
132 keesje : Well GE is looking at a better engine to improve the 777 and /or 787-10. It will be an uncomfortable job answering major customers asking that engine
133 LAXDESI : I expect some conversions from 788 to 789, which would bring the order ratio between A359 and B789 closer. Nor sure how A389 overcomes the lack of fr
134 SR4ever : The CX Letter of Intent is indeed very good news for the European industry, but not so good news for big European operators of 343, namely LH, AF, IB
135 Post contains images ElbowRoom : Thanks for that. I got back to thinking how much width the 77W (or 77E or L) NG has got to play with. Cabin width is going to be limited by the fusel
136 BMI727 : The numbers I've seen say 8,000-8,500 NM. I'd guess closer to the 8,000 end of the range though. Probably, since the 777 is already a borderline 10 w
137 hawkercamm : The -1000 does not EIS until 2015 and is probably slightly ahead of its market. I expect a rapid rise in A350-1000 orders in the years to come. I exp
138 WingedMigrator : Because a 13% fuselage stretch results in 32% (+12 LD3s) increase in cargo space. Like magic!
139 SR4ever : 788 at LH and LX? Why? Which aircraft would they replace?
140 BMI727 : A330-200s presumably. My first impression is that the 787 would probably do very nicely for Swiss, but Lufthansa might be better off with the A350.
141 LAXDESI : Its probably 10 LD3 positions, of which 4 would be needed for the additional passengers. Relative to 77W, A389 would have a low freight to passenger
142 astuteman : Boeing's website says 8 000 - 8 500Nm and 250 to 290 pax. I'll admit to interpreting that as 8 000Nm with 290 pax and 8 500Nm with 250 pax. Because l
143 BMI727 : That could be, but it could be that they just don't know yet.
144 A342 : LH only had a few leased A332 and got rid of them a few years ago. LX is currently replacing theirs with A333s. LH's fleet manager is on record sayin
145 SR4ever : When the current LX order of 10 333 (+1 for WK) is fully delivered in the coming months, I understand that there will be at best only 1-2 332 left at
146 BMI727 : Just one more reason why Boeing should get moving with the 787-10.
147 kaitak : Well, nothing gets the A.net gang going into overdrive like a nice, juicy order - and this is a particularly nice one! A few points come to mind: 1) T
148 columba : AF and LH have waited with the A380 as well. They let others deal with teething problems of the new model and get their first when all the early prob
149 Post contains images EPA001 : There are differences for sure. And they are big enough for many airlines now to favor the product Airbus is offering in this market. . Very sharply
150 BMI727 : The sooner the better. I'd say same size as the A350-1000 but less range. Stretched obviously, but definitely a somewhat modified wing as well. Boein
151 BlueSky1976 : Here we go again... Some Boeing kool-aid drinkers need to realize that the 777-300ER wasn't really flying off the shelves either five years before EI
152 SR4ever : Actually, the 332 is becoming less and less popular in Europe, and among European majors, AF and KLM are the only ones to operate them. At AF, it was
153 Hugin : One question/comment from a lurker - Do we see a real competition between A&B in the wide body market, given that they are selling out the product
154 kiwiandrew : What makes you say their days are numbered ? AZ actually has several more A332s on order , don't they ? It doesn't seem likely that they are planning
155 Post contains images SR4ever : Indeed, I forgot about that extra order, and got confused with the order for 12+12 358 I presume that the 330 will replace the current 6 763 then.
156 Stitch : Boeing Chairman and CEO Jim McNerney, in their last Investor Conference call, noted that they feel the 787-9's nominal range will be around the 8150n
157 PM : That really is denying what's in front of your face. Here - again - is what was said: How “We’re committed to not developing an engine for a comp
158 Revelation : Yep, and Boeing is still selling 777s along side 787 and A350s. I understand CX just firmed up a few 777s, no? Oh yes, it's in this very thread. Isn'
159 CFBFrame : No, not at all. Using the A346 is an excellent example because it never got off the ground!!! So despite it having a earlier EIS than the 77W, who ow
160 Post contains images WingedMigrator : Gotcha. Indeed the 77W is a freight train in the sky.
161 BMI727 : I think we absolutely will see Cathay order some other variant of A350 as well, probably the -1000, but I wouldn't rule out a few -800s either.
162 astuteman : We could have said the same about the business manager for the 787 when all of those 600+ A330's were sold, I guess. But even then, the long-term out
163 Post contains images PM : With total orders approaching 600, the success of the A350 can no longer be wished away. So those who wish it ill are now attacking the -1000 as a "fa
164 BMI727 : I think as of now the -1000 is a sleeping giant. I think that of all the A350 models, that is the one that would be causing Boeing execs to lose the
165 PM : I think that's dead right. It has been rumoured that this Cathay order was for 15 x -900 and 15 x -1000 until very recently. Why it changed, I don't
166 BMI727 : I'd say that the closest A350 variant to being a "failure" (whatever measure you want to use) will be the -800. As the smallest variant, it will be ca
167 Post contains links and images astuteman : Certainly in the interview with Tim Clark on the 777NG recently, where TC told Boeing not to worry too much about the A350-1000, McNerney said http:/
168 BMI727 : Well, that's Emirates, and it's understandable because they (and seemingly the other Middle Eastern carriers) are more concerned with capacity, and t
169 BoeingVista : The A350XWB can go 10 wide but even at 10 wide it would carry less people than a 777 at 10 wide. Most airlines don't see the need to run 10 wide and
170 Stitch : I'm not trying to be contrary for the sake of being contrary. Boeing and GE Aviation senior management have been quoted in the press as saying there
171 BMI727 : Not easily. The A350XWB is still nearly a foot narrower than the current 777, which is a bit tight at ten across. Well, that's where the 787 comes in
172 JerseyFlyer : Does it really matter? Especially if airlines trade up to the -900 instead of ordering the -800. The -800 is now a relatively cheap shrink to manufac
173 BoeingVista : Not true, you get the same seat width as a 747 at 10 across.
174 BMI727 : Probably not, which is why I put failure in quotes. The -800 won't cost a lot to develop and therefore will probably make a profit for Airbus, which
175 Burkhard : Completely agree. 358/359 will be simlar to 77L/77W, the very long range market is a niche market. But it is necessary to have an offer in every mark
176 BMI727 : The thing with the A350 too, is that the -900R should be even better at extreme ranges than the -800, which is going to do no favors for the -800. My
177 Post contains links and images keesje : I think only 15-25% of the A350-900 will be converted to -1000s. Just like happens on the 777, 787, A330, 737s. Probably in the contract Cathay has cl
178 frigatebird : There are actually quite a few airlines that have the A358 on order as the only variant. But I wouldn't be surprised to see many of them converting t
179 BlueSky1976 : Exactly. Believe me, I am. Don't forget that the Mighty Tripple Seven is a well-mature product, which exceeded its estimated design performance and s
180 vfw614 : Isn't it often the case that once a larger, not-"overstretched" (like the 757-300, 767-400) WB sub-type comes on the market, the smaller sub-type bec
181 keesje : I think a 900R will benefit from a higher payload from hot Asian places at >6000NM flights.
182 ElbowRoom : I think you're confusing the A350XWB at 9 abreast with the A350XWB at 10 abreast! My calcs say: - A350XWB 9 abreast with 50cm aisles = 51.2cm per sea
183 Revelation : Is calling the A350XWB-1000 a "failure" in a now-deleted post? I searched for the word "failure" and did not see it associated with the -1000, only i
184 Post contains images keesje : Nope. I think Boeing should start working on a bigger/engine wing for the 787 ASAP, EIS 2016. Preferably a -11 too. I'm not confident a reengined 777
185 BMI727 : I wouldn't either, since the difference in trip costs probably won't be that great. I would agree. About 400 NM more than the A359, but about 1000 NM
186 Post contains images EA772LR : I agree. A simple stretched 787-10 would have better than 7,000nm range and could work well very well for many airlines, that don't need the extra ra
187 frmrcapcadet : Nice post. Boeing having gotten the jump on the 788 size, Airbus made their offering a half(?) a step up in size. I suspect that this would have been
188 Baroque : In some ways they appear to be trying to do unto Boeing what Boeing did unto DeH and the Trident*. Remains to see how successful they will be, but wh
189 Post contains links Revelation : Here's what Boeing CEO McNearny said in June: And with regard to the weight reduction of 787: So he's saying that Boeing is going to wait till they k
190 Stitch : Doesn't seem to be much demand for that mission considering that the A345 and B77L didn't make much of a dent in that market. They all seem to be hap
191 LAXDESI : Going by my calculations, the efficiency dividing line between 9 and 10 abreast, for clean sheet design, is around 370 seats(3 class typical marketin
192 Post contains images EPA001 : It would indeed. But I guess the A350-1100 is also a card Airbus might play at some point in time further down the road. . That is a question I and s
193 LAXDESI : A 787-11( 400 seats at 80m)/A350-11 would be more efficient than a minimally/maximally refreshed 77W NG(10 abreast, 400 seat), as 77W NG will not be
194 scbriml : Not to split hairs, but CX said (my emphasis) That clearly leaves space for larger long-haul planes in the fleet. Let's see where they go, but in the
195 Post contains links keesje : I think Cathay leaves the door open for a VLA order. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...airliners-despite-big-twinjet.html
196 Post contains images EPA001 : Even if you were splitting hairs, you are correct. The way I stated it left no room for an upgrade from the A350-900 to an A350-1000. . In any case,
197 Post contains images EPA001 : Thanks for posting this Keesje. I missed that item the last time when I looked at the flightglobal website. I like what is stated in this article.
198 scbriml : No, I think there's certainly room for the -1000 and I strongly believe Cathay will order it. Like Emirates, I think Cathay will operate both the A35
199 BMI727 : It would be nice for Boeing to have a 787-11, but I don't think it is necessary unless you already have put most of the investment into the -10. Yes,
200 LAXDESI : Emirates has expressed an interest in higher payload/range for a 77W sized aircraft, and it already flies the 77W with 10 abreast in Y. Unless Boeing
201 BMI727 : I don't think that you need to. Get a 777-300NG to fly 8500 NM or so at least and then make the 777-400 a straight stretch. Which is why you would on
202 scbriml : It's difficult to believe that a triple-stretch could be very efficient without a whole new wing and supporting structure. The cost could be pretty h
203 LAXDESI : To get it to a range of 8,500 nm in 10 abreast, Boeing would need to reduce its weight by 10 tons for a gain of 240 nm in range, and another 260 nm c
204 Post contains images justloveplanes : Methodical and thorough is key. The last time Boeing stated they "lost discipline", Scott Carson was discussing the 787 multi-year delay. Doubt that
205 BMI727 : On another thread Astuteman gave a conservative estimate of a 4% SFC improvement. Which is closer to reality I don't know. They could probably get re
206 Stitch : I'm intrigued to see if they don't go 747-8 to start, with A380-900 added down the road when it becomes available. It would allow them to apply their
207 LAXDESI : As I understand, most of the weight savings would come from the wings. It would make more sense to make a final decision on the wing once for all, co
208 BMI727 : I don't see much point in that. It would probably be just another 747-8i. Either do it right or put that money into the 787 instead and end the 777 l
209 sunrisevalley : They are on record as being satisfied with a 3-class ~354 seats. What they want (ideally in my view ) is 55-tonne payload ~7800nm ESAD 100% of the ti
210 sunrisevalley : What does MLG stand for? I do not see it as an abbreviation in any Boeing or AirBus ACAP sheets.
211 BoeingVista : Main landing gear
212 LAXDESI : IIRC, they are short by about 16t from their target of 55t payload. Can Boeing reduce the weight that much without a composite wing? If the engines c
213 PM : Is this strategy something they have announced or are you just inferring it? The TriStar + RB211s order was political (thank you, Michael Heseltine)
214 BoeingVista : 748s with GE
215 Stitch : I agree they have been buying the right plane for the job. As such, I happen to think the 747-8 and A380-900 would also be the right planes for the jo
216 PM : Ah, yes. (Damn - I knew I'd forget something!) OK, but there's no official "dual OEM policy", is there?
217 Stitch : Maybe there is, maybe there is not. CX has been purchasing both Boeing and Airbus aircraft for at least a decade. after all. Perhaps I should have us
218 Post contains images keesje : 300 seats + cargo long haul from HKG for the next 20 years requires a state of the art (2015) 80-90k lbs engine. Oddly, they can't be bought hanging u
219 Stitch : I doubt CX has been buying - and continues to add - 777-300ERs with 115,000 lbs engine with the expectation of only getting a few years of service ou
220 keesje : For a different segment, the 350-400 seat 773ER. A bitter sweet victory. Total worldwide backlog for the 773ER has shrunk to 186, and 17 200LR's. (26
221 328JET : @ Stitch I am far away from being a fan of engine exclusive deals. In my opinion the B77W could have a better SFC if a competing engine would have bee
222 Stitch : CX fits 301 seats into their 777-300ERs... The A350-900 fleet will likely be two-class birds, so that's ~280-340. And yet GE has not been sitting on
223 EA772LR : If I'm not mistaken GE has earned 537 sales with it's exclusivity on the 777LR and Freighter programs. Not to mention all of the other success they'v
224 panais : What you are suggesting is the same strategy that Boeing had with the 737 and the 757. Same frames different engines and wings. Airbus is pulling an
225 328JET : @ Stitch I do not agree. Competition drives the market, nothing else. 4 percent improvement is nice, but how do you know that the current GE90-115 is
226 keesje : Yes and BA fits 270 seats in a 744, like ANA and Cathay fits 310 seats in a A330. You get the picture I guess. That's about the number RR has A350s i
227 328JET : @ Keesje I think Boeing biggest mistake on the B787-9 is the small wing in comparison to the A350-900. The growth potential is limited, i would assume
228 justloveplanes : GE is not on the 350 program because Airbus didn't want the GEnX. So eventually, as GE concentrates its efforts on GE90NG and GEnx, RR will have to co
229 Stitch : As good as it is, the 777-300ER does not exist in a vacuum. It faced competition from the A340-600 and 747-400 and it faces competition now from the
230 328JET : @ JLP GE is not on the A350, because GE did not want to offer an engine for the A350-1000 ! @ Stitch We are talking about a difference of around 100m2
231 Post contains images astuteman : For what it's worth, I personally believe the improvements will come in the reverse order to the one you describe. The GE90-115B is, at best, on a pa
232 Swallow : Interesting comment! I guess it makes sense since on the 789 GE leads RR 152:104 for customers who have made an engine selection [as per Wiki]. Furth
233 SEPilot : True; and the 77W with the GE-90 is competing against the paper A3510 on one side and the A380 on the other. If its economics get too seriously out o
234 Post contains images Stitch : It still doesn't alter that fact that the A350's design came after the 787's. Unless you are arguing Boeing should have scrapped the 787's wing in 20
235 Post contains images 328JET : @ Stitch You are a little wrong. Boeing decided to make the wing of the B789 as small as the B788-wing AFTER Airbus freezed their A350-wing design...
236 Post contains images keesje : I think the only reason Airbus keeps the A340-600 offer is to keep Boeing honest on 773ER pricing, and it worked very well. .. OMG can't believe I ca
237 ElbowRoom : I think this is spot on. And your descriptions of the roles of the three models are perfect. Meanwhile, Boeing has perhaps 'pulled a 777' (two sizes,
238 JAL : Great news but I wonder if CX will eventually go for the 787s too?
239 Stitch : Yes, because the aerodynamic advantages of that extra 4m of span were insufficient to counter the extra weight of the structure. So the 787-9 would h
240 Baroque : Well yes they do, and all that is possible, but I suspect when the resident engine guru arrives he will pronounce it a New Engine. Which is exactly w
241 Post contains images EPA001 : That is my recollection as well.
242 astuteman : Apologies Stitch, but I don't think that this is actually an accurate representation of the trade-off that was made. Boeing themselves said that the
243 Stitch : Well the GE90-115b Mk. II would be too large to fit under the A350, I would think. Fair enough. Still, it can't be all that crippling for the model o
244 Post contains images astuteman : Indeed. And if, as you say, the 60m wing is demonstrating ability above and beyond the call of duty, the Boeing have treated themselves to a well-ear
245 328JET : On my opinion the B789 and A359 do not play in the same game. The A359 is far more capable A343 /B77E replacement, the B789 replaces mainly A333s. The
246 EA772LR : With all do respect, that's way off IMO. The 789 dimensionally is much closer to the A333/343, but has far more built in capability than either, part
247 Stitch : If the 787-9 was designed to be a medium-range airplane, it would have an MTOW significantly less and require less powerful engines to allow it to fl
248 BMI727 : I disagree. Boeing did not reduce the effort they need to put in to have a competitive 787 family, they just delayed it. Now instead of drawing the l
249 328JET : Time will tell who of us is right. But i still do not get how an B789 should perform as good as an A359 which has a 30 percent bigger wing... @ stitch
250 Stitch : Because that wing adds weight and that contributes to making the A350-900 heavier than the 787-9 by many tons. Airbus believes 787-9 without any inte
251 hawkercamm : I understand the span was clipped due to the side-of-body root joint issue. The current mod'ed root joint concept is now not compatible with the wing
252 LAXDESI : Assuming Boeing does the above, and your estimates are correct, then the B77W NG(10 abreast, 400 seats), by my calculations, would do better than A35
253 Post contains images astuteman : Perhaps, That said, fuel burn is related to drag, and weight is just one element of the fuel burn equation, the counter to which is usually greater s
254 ncfc99 : Whilst I agree this is the way forward for Boeing(from my immensly ammeturish CEO chair) what engine issues does this throw up. What engines could be
255 Stitch : If that is what is holding back the 64m span, it seems odd that Boeing could not fix it in time for the 787-9's EIS... They've already modified the 7
256 XT6Wagon : Source? For the 1000th time it seems, people need to be reminded that the issue at the wing joint wasn't weakness, but too much strength. The stringe
257 JoeCanuck : There are so many options available for Boeing to NG the 777 but some are easier and cheaper than others. An all new replacement would have some serio
258 BMI727 : I find it hard to believe that Boeing would not be able to find a workaround between June of 2009 and the 787-9's design freeze about a year later, o
259 GlobalCabotage : Maybe we will finally see CX metal at DFW and ORD!
260 hawkercamm : Sort of correct but load increase equals more strain and at some point you hit the new mod'ed concept capability limit. What this means is the design
261 hawkercamm : To support the B789 MTOW increase Boeing will need to redesign the wing structure again anyway. Not the structural concept but material thicknesses,
262 LAXDESI : I would think thinner sidewall will be part of any refresh, minor or major. How much weight can Boeing expect to save by going to Ali-li? Astutement
263 hawkercamm : On a ~40,000kg Al fuse I'd guess AlLi will save 1000kg. More with laser or friction stir welding and/or larger panels
264 sunrisevalley : Way back Widebodyphotog ran many airliners through PIANO X which analysis is considered de rigueur. At that time ( 2007) he ran a 6000nm mission for a
265 Post contains links PM : Actually, rather few. But GE aren't going to 'opt' so the point is moot. I see no reason why having exclusivity on the A350 would stop RR fighting ha
266 zeke : What the company has said to internally is the decision was not made on price alone. It was a combination of factors, the A350 provides more seats, w
267 astuteman : For the parasitic drag for the wings (i.e. about 3% of overall drag). And compared to previous Airbus wings. If this were an Airbus, the construction
268 JoeCanuck : As long as they are finally figuring out how to get weight savings with CFRP. Regardless, I agree that if you're going to go through that much work,
269 scbriml : Something that doesn't generally seem to have been picked up, and I cannot provide a source, is that the LOI is for 30 plus 30 options.
270 Baroque : Probably not, just as it would not fit all that well under a 787-10 or 11 come to that, unless they are a "bit different" to the current manifestatio
271 Post contains images justloveplanes : Can't believe Boeing is incapable of putting a 64m wing on a 787. Can't get there
272 Stitch : I still think Airbus' dismissal of the GEnx was more a PR move - they want a "new" engine for their "new" airplane so they can tell customers the 787
273 Post contains links LipeGIG : This become too long, and it's now closed. Please continue the discussion on the Part II, just open CX Orders 30 Airbus A350-900 Part II (by LipeGIG A
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 Getting Up To €3.5B Launch Aid For A350 posted Fri Jun 5 2009 14:18:07 by N1786b
Potential Client For A350/B787 - Bellview Airlines posted Wed Jun 11 2008 05:37:50 by Aviationbuff
Hexcel To Supply Composite Materials For A350 XWB posted Wed Jun 4 2008 08:52:39 by Aviationbuff
Airbus Asking For State Aid For A350 posted Tue May 27 2008 17:27:46 by NAV20
FI - Airbus Targets Aug For A350 Work Packages posted Mon Mar 31 2008 03:39:56 by Astuteman
Airbus Wants Support For A350 Jets - Reuters posted Sat Nov 24 2007 16:23:46 by EI321
Turkish Airlines Nears Order For A350 Or B787 posted Thu Nov 1 2007 02:45:02 by PanAm_DC10
Airbus Get Kingfisher Order For A350 posted Wed Jun 20 2007 10:00:31 by Asiaflyer
Gecas CEO Says No Plan For A350 Order posted Mon Jun 18 2007 19:29:23 by NYC777
Airbus Lobbies GE To Offer GEnx For A350 XWB posted Fri Apr 20 2007 12:12:09 by Keesje
AirAsia Orders 30 Airbus 320s posted Thu Aug 4 2005 11:25:49 by Squirrel83
Jetblue Orders 30 Airbus! posted Mon Jun 18 2001 11:38:01 by Boeing in pdx
Cathay Pacific Orders 30 A350 posted Thu Sep 16 2010 01:46:31 by Icarus75
A350 Cabin Mock May Tip The Orders To Airbus posted Mon Apr 3 2006 20:12:28 by AirA380
Airbus A350 Launch Agreement, 200 Orders Year End posted Fri Sep 16 2005 16:51:18 by Keesje
CX Orders New Boeing's & Airbus's posted Thu Apr 15 2004 04:34:01 by Sydscott
Airbus A350 XWB, 2011, Progress, 5-6 Month Delay? posted Thu Dec 23 2010 09:29:17 by keesje
Condor Airlines Orders 30 A320s posted Sun Dec 5 2010 10:15:13 by Chiad
BOC Aviation Inks Deal For 30 Airbus A320s posted Wed Nov 3 2010 03:16:30 by aviationbuff