Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus To Launch A320 NEO Wednesday (1.Dec)  
User currently offlineEaa3 From Iceland, joined Sep 2007, 1152 posts, RR: 0
Posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 37052 times:

Flight Global claims:

Confirmed: A320 NEO to launch Wednesday, EIS targets 2016


Given the aviation nature of this forum we should probably discuss this  

218 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
User currently offline14ccKemiskt From Sweden, joined Nov 2010, 86 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 36954 times:

Given the supposed fuel saving of around 15%, the slow sales of the A320 this year and that Airbus has found the resources to develop the NEO, this should have been a no-brainer.

I'm a bit concerned that they maybe will be straining their resources here, given how much still is to be done on the other three (!) programs. I hope Boeing keeps their heads calm and awaits the response to this before diving into some over-enthusiastic project of their own.


User currently offlineEaa3 From Iceland, joined Sep 2007, 1152 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 36660 times:

I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

User currently offlinekl911 From Netherlands, joined Jul 2003, 5500 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 36661 times:

Quoting 14ccKemiskt (Reply 1):
given how much still is to be done on the other three (!) programs.

What three programs? Im aware of the A350 only at the moment. The military A400 is more EADS then Airbus IMO.

User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 36585 times:

Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

It's a completely different situation from your reference to the A3350/A350XWB

User currently offline14ccKemiskt From Sweden, joined Nov 2010, 86 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 36321 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 3):
What three programs? Im aware of the A350 only at the moment. The military A400 is more EADS then Airbus IMO.

Well, I was suggesting that the A380 program still eats quite a bit of developing resources. And that the people working on the A400M probably could be moved within Airbus if needed.

Then on the other hand, maybe the most efficient way of developing new aircraft is to do it in semi-parallell programs in order to keep up the competence and to gain economy of scale.

But i do welcome the NEO and I hope they'll get it right and on time.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 7546 posts, RR: 51
Reply 6, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 36308 times:

Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

They won't have a choice. They can, of course, buy 737's with the old engines, or wait for Boeing to build its replacement (which this announcement will likely trigger.) Airbus simply does not have the resources to design a completely new plane at this point.

The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineAesma From Reunion, joined Nov 2009, 8788 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 36223 times:

Just when Boeing is struggling, let's turn the knife in the wound ?

Or it may be an opportunity for B to launch the "797" to blow some smoke over the 787.

New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 6364 posts, RR: 33
Reply 8, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 36181 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 7):

With at least 5 years before EIS, Boeing has a bit of breathing room. They can wait until they get the 787 sorted out.

Five years should be enough...right...?

What the...?
User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4909 posts, RR: 13
Reply 9, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 36088 times:

Quoting AirNZ (Reply 4):
Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

It's a completely different situation from your reference to the A3350/A350XWB

Much appreciated if you could elaborate - thanks. Would some airlines not balk at spending on an ageing fuselage and wing design?

It would be nice to see new cabins in this 'workhorse' market segment. Any improvements in engine design accrue to the airline and not to pax comfort.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 34061 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 35911 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Even if the majority of Boeing and Airbus customers wanted a brand new narrowbody family, Boeing and Airbus can't deliver it. Airbus is trying to get the A350 into production and Boeing is trying to get the 787 into service and neither has the resources to launch a new airplane program right now, so mild updates is what customers are going to have to settle for since there is no real competition through the end of the decade, at which point both OEMs will be able to launch new aircraft programs.

User currently offlineSR4ever From Luxembourg, joined Mar 2010, 910 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 35853 times:

With hindsight, one can expect the coming decade to be a very busy one for Airbus...

Till 2012/2013: design & production improvements for the 380-800

2013: EIS 350-900

2013/2014: EIS 330-300 Extra HGW?

2015: EIS 350-800

2015/2016: EIS 350-1000?

2016: EIS 380-900?

2016: EIS 319/320/321 (322?) NEO

User currently offlineTangowhisky From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1054 posts, RR: 7
Reply 12, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 35677 times:

Quoting Eaa3 (Reply 2):
I wonder whether airlines will accept the A320 update or demand a totally new aircraft as was the case with the A350.

Airlines tend to be conservative. They don't jump readily on all new designs that often. A320NEO will be easier to ramp up sales.

Quoting 14ccKemiskt (Reply 1):
I'm a bit concerned that they maybe will be straining their resources here

Hey, there is a recession out there with many engineers and technicians looking for work. Plus EADS is not really concerned these days on the next quarterly earnings.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 7):
Or it may be an opportunity for B to launch the "797" to blow some smoke over the 787.

Boeing will take it easy and not react that fast. They will continue with the script by saying that they are looking at re-engining and all new design options.

Only the paranoid survive
User currently offlineKFlyer From Sri Lanka, joined Mar 2007, 1252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 19 hours ago) and read 35410 times:

IMHO, I do not expect Boeing to announce anything before year end - and expect a 797 EIS in 2018 or later.

The opinions above are solely my own and do not express those of my employers or clients.
User currently offlineAloha717200 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 4557 posts, RR: 14
Reply 14, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 35378 times:

May possibly be better for Boeing this way, give them time to evaluate the 320NEO and come up with something even better.

...and then have it enter service 10 years late.   

User currently offlinefrmrCapCadet From United States of America, joined May 2008, 2108 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 35203 times:

Airbus is going to need a delta of a lot less than $7-8 million to sell an updated 320. And Boeing can counter by saving several billion and just drop their prices a million or two which will make for an even more extravigant delta.

Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlinesirtoby From Germany, joined Nov 2007, 515 posts, RR: 22
Reply 16, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 18 hours ago) and read 35176 times:

Press release is out on the Airbus website!
EIS confirmed for Spring 2016!

User currently offlineflyingAY From Finland, joined Jun 2007, 760 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 35144 times:

Quoting sirtoby (Reply 16):
Press release is out on the Airbus website!

Here's a direct link to the Airbus press release:

As already speculated here, Airbus confirms the following:

* CFM LEAP-X or P&W PurePower PW1100G as engine options
* sharklets
* fuel savings up to 15% (compared to what?)
* NEO option offered for A319, A320 and A321
* 500 nm more range or 2t more payload

[Edited 2010-11-30 22:39:12]

User currently offlinePanAm_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4287 posts, RR: 83
Reply 18, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 35123 times:

Here is the announcement from Airbus.

Airbus offers new fuel saving engine options for A320 Family

Airbus has decided to offer for its best-selling A320 Family new fuel saving engines as an option. Airlines have the choice between CFM International’s LEAP-X engine and Pratt & Whitney’s PurePower PW1100G engine. Known as the A320neo, this new engine option also incorporates fuel-saving large wing tip devices called Sharklets. Airbus will start deliveries of the A320neo Family in spring 2016.

The A320neo will not only deliver significant fuel savings of up to 15 percent, which represents up to 3,600 tonnes of CO2 savings annually per A320neo. In addition, A320neo customers will benefit from a double-digit reduction in NOx emissions, reduced engine noise, lower operating costs and up to 500nm (950 km) more range or two tonnes more payload.

More at Airbus.com

Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 4406 posts, RR: 11
Reply 19, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 34958 times:

Quoting flyingAY (Reply 17):
* fuel savings up to 15% (compared to what?)

I'm guessing against the current CFM-56 powered version of the A32x family.

This is about what both engine manufacturers are offering in terms of gain savings against the current generation of narrowboy engines (commonly referred to as the CFM56...).
The engines are what will bring most of the fuel saving figure. Airframe rework will only add a handful of percentage points on the overall efficiency. This is why neither manufacturer wanted to dive head first into a clean sheet design so soon. The game changing engine technology is just not there yet to provide the 25%+ efficiency gain the airlines were claiming. But both the LEAP-X and GTF should provide a pretty good step up in the meantime.

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineKFlyer From Sri Lanka, joined Mar 2007, 1252 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 17 hours ago) and read 34899 times:

IMHO, this made the 797's prospects brighter.  
Boeing now has sufficient time to innovate a better clean sheet design.

The opinions above are solely my own and do not express those of my employers or clients.
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 34664 times:

I guess the only moderately surprizing news is 2016 iso 2014 or 2015..

I can imagine airlines are not entirely satisfied with that and will push Airbus (e.g. converting existing 2013 slots to the NEO etc.)

User currently offlinePM From Namibia, joined Feb 2005, 7298 posts, RR: 63
Reply 22, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 34521 times:

Slightly off-topic, but notice how the 'A320' on the picture is now in the new Airbus typeface.

User currently offliner2rho From Spain, joined Feb 2007, 3565 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 34514 times:

Major announcement indeed. This fixes the Airbus narrowbody strategy for the next 15 years or so. NEO in 2016 and all-new A30X around 2025-27. This also means that the GTF has convince Airbus (remember that all the NEO rumors started after they tested a GTF prototype on their A340-600 test a/c).

I'm surprised Airbus made the move first, but they probably had no choice. They have no resources to launch an all-new program (heck, I have my doubts that they can manage NEO), so it was NEO or nothing. This first move also puts Boeing into an akward position - although they are in a better position in terms of engineering design resources, a 737reengine may not be as competitive, and open-rotor may not be mature enough.

Quoting SR4ever (Reply 11):
Till 2012/2013: design & production improvements for the 380-800

2013: EIS 350-900

2013/2014: EIS 330-300 Extra HGW?

2015: EIS 350-800

2015/2016: EIS 350-1000?

2016: EIS 380-900?

2016: EIS 319/320/321 (322?) NEO

...and let's not forget A380 production is still not 100% sorted out (although those would be more production than engineering resources), and that A400M has significant development (and likely redesign) work ahead. All this is going to be tough to manage in parallel.

User currently offlinethediplomat From Ireland, joined Jun 2006, 382 posts, RR: 6
Reply 24, posted (5 years 5 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 34399 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 9):
Would some airlines not balk at spending on an ageing fuselage and wing design?

How old is the 737 fuselage design?

Quoting KFlyer (Reply 20):
IMHO, this made the 797's prospects brighter.

Why is that?

25 scouseflyer : Any new developments are good news, hopefully they'll give this bird a proper new name rather then A320neo (this isn't the matrix!) they should be cal
26 astuteman : Which I'm going to guess is primarily driven by the need to secure the engineering resources for the other programmes...... Although having said that
27 328JET : Ok, i stand corrected. I really expected more updates against the original A32x-family. I am not sure if a new engine alone should bring EIS to 2016 i
28 keesje : That is what Airbus hopes. I think it is a best guess with some hope behind it. I think Airbus announcements are driven by a desire to temper growth
29 CYatUK : Could we say the same about IAE? Obviously there are still a few years of production ahead but ultimately with the arrival of A32X NEO in 2016 and th
30 Post contains links rheinwaldner : Some points: - The quite late EIS is IMO a concession to the constrained resource situation. It has built in much more reserves than once anticipated
31 astuteman : I think you're right that the EIS date also aims to protect the current backlog, and mitigate the impact to current A32X residuals Rgds
32 328JET : No, a good day. The A318 will not be offered as NEO and so both could be operated side-by-side by the same airlines with the new PW-engines.
33 frigatebird : And the availability of the new engines themselves... The first model to have the NEO option is the A320, the A321 will follow later. Pretty sure the
34 Post contains images aerokiwi : Because...? Not necessarily disagreeing with you, but without a bit of meat on the bones your statement is fairly dismissive and a bit hollow. Yeah I
35 art : The 15% fuel saving: - is that overall (mix of sector lengths) or a best case scenario (compared to what the A320 burns on its longest sector) - when
36 KFlyer : The late EIS is mainly due to the LEAP-X's late EIS. I too believe that the C Series will not get a considerable threat from A320neo. A319neo will sti
37 parapente : 2016 is a good EIS IMHO.It is the year that Cfm are contracturally obliged to have the production engines coming off the line for the 919 (even if the
38 frigatebird : According to Airbus "The A320neo will have over 95 percent airframe commonality with the standard A320 Family" So there is just 5% those fleet manage
39 Post contains images keesje : A few months ago Air France said they need an extra effort to to improve the A320 NEO. - 10% to 14% better direct exploitation costs, - wing improveme
40 328JET : I know that the first model will be the A320, which makes sense as it is the oldest version. But spring 2016 for the A320NEO, could mean late 2016 fo
41 frigatebird : AF will have te settle with the A320NEO as offered. What choice will they have? The A319's and A318's aren't that old yet, so I expect AF to wait unt
42 keesje : EIS 2016, when is the design freeze, late 2012 ? 2013?
43 LPSHobby : will the A321 NEO have the same range of a 757 ( 7200km) ?
44 XT6Wagon : If the NEO price is 7-8million higher like Airbus said it might be, they can very well just buy conventional A320 with sharklets until Boeing has som
45 parapente : "will the A321 NEO have the same range of a 757 ( 7200km) ?" No not if straight math is applied to existing quotes ranges (plus max 15%).If as Keesje
46 packsonflight : If Airbus can increase the MTOW of the 321NEO while the are at it, of lets say 3000kg, they have a very capable aircraft.
47 B777LRF : I think it's fair to say they already have a very capable aircraft, and that the NEO will make it a very, very capable aircraft indeed. Not quite abl
48 Post contains links PanAm_DC10 : Flightglobal, referencing ATI, have a report in which they quote Mr Leahy on who Airbus see as initial customers for the A320neo even though they have
49 parapente : Reply 47. If Airbus can increase the MTOW of the 321NEO while the are at it, of lets say 3000kg, they have a very capable aircraft. Interesting point.
50 keesje : "Boeing Keeps Options Open On New Engines, Aircraft" http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20101201-705332.html> "He said the 737 is significantly mo
51 SR4ever : IB and AZ are likely to comme soon after LH. LX 321s are also pretty old now (they were ordered by SR 20yrs ago). Wasn't Airbus eyeing a A322 20 yrs a
52 Post contains links and images keesje : I think a 200 seater (single class) is the missing link.. The A321 is much bigger then the A320 (up to 220 seats) There's an off the shelve solution
53 B777LRF : It is indeed marketing spin. Someone on this site posted fuel burn figures at MZFW for the A320 (IAE and CFM) and the B738. If memory serves me right
54 packsonflight : I would think that upping the ZFW would prove more valuable since the NEO will burn less fuel anyway. And if you still need more range, belly tanks w
55 Burkhard : Not here were the A320s are built - our economy has the biggest growth rate since the unification boom. 3.7% growth official now and this even conser
56 JerseyFlyer : Yes but with or without sharklets?
57 scouseflyer : I didn't realise that, I thought that that crown was curerntly held by the A380 (and will evntually be snatched by the B787)
58 Aesma : Breathing room ? With what will they compete in 2016, if they just launch an all new plane then ? On the contrary they have no breathing room at all
59 columba : My bet on the launch customer is Jetblue, they were the first who demanded more range from the A320 and were the first who tested an A320 with winglet
60 CFBFrame : This is most interesting because the current Airbus plan ends up increasing product complexity, so they will have to deal with Classic customers, NEO
61 parapente : HELP PLEASE! "However, he points out that "at some point in time" it will make more sense for customers to order the Neo because of the weight savings
62 WildcatYXU : I'd guess ... sharklets?
63 airbazar : Granted, not a big customer, but I would be somewhat shocked if TP didn't order these. The extra 500nm would allow TP to fly the right sized plane to
64 Stitch : I can't believe it will take Airbus five years to adapt the LEAP-X and PW1100G to the A320 platform. I'm guessing the real reason for the 2016 EIS is
65 Post contains links Eaa3 : I think that they are going to have to do more than just upgrade the engines. I think that they can't develop a plane with the ultimate plan of making
66 SR4ever : Yes, to a pretty large extend. Now the issue is whether such frame will efficiently feature a 3 if not a 4-class seating layout... 321-800 (?) could
67 CFBFrame : Can you share a source on this? I'm more interested in reading more about this. I'm not sure this 15% number is related to anything currently. Think
68 Eaa3 : I would not be suprised if Icelandair ordered these planes. Having a family of aircraft, A319,A320 and A321, that could all be deployed to Europe and
69 Post contains links and images keesje : Leahy (Airbus): : “It was a no brainer, we know the business case is excellent.” Coupron (ILFC) : “If indeed the Airbus product offering offers
70 Post contains images Stitch : Considering how strongly the 737 has been selling this year, one wonders if the A320neo was Airbus' response? If the 737 can continue to sell 400-500
71 Post contains images WildcatYXU : Now that's an interesting remark. New engine design from PW, new aircraft from Airbus utilizing it. Why does it sound familiar? (OK, I know that it w
72 ER757 : 15% efficiency gain and 500 nm range improvement don't sound marginal to me.
73 brendows : Numbers I've seen supports this, that the 737NG has a lower fuel burn on longer legs compared to the A320. The margin isn't huge, but it's noticeable
74 RoseFlyer : Great news from Airbus! I am a bit surprised to see them go for both LeapX and Geared TurboFan. I would have thought it would be one or the other sinc
75 Tangowhisky : The good news is that there is now more credibility for the Pratt Engine. The bad news is that Airbus are offering more range with a lower operating
76 parapente : I feel certain (as others) that they already have a few orders in the bag.This is a major "New Gen" launch.They are going to milk it a far as possible
77 JoeCanuck : Now things get interesting. When will the sales come? I really doubt that Airbus would have released the NEO for sale without some pretty solid reassu
78 Tangowhisky : Who cares about OEW? At the end of the day, it is the cash operating costs and price of the airplanes. Airbus is narrowing the gap with the A319neo a
79 Post contains images keesje : Agreed, it's simply leaner, lighter, less capable and more fuel efficient. I hope Bombardier doesn't wait to long with the 150 seat 2 class CS500. It
80 airbazar : Oh come on. Do you really thing that companies that invest billions in aircraft aquisition and fleet planning really get distracted that easily? It's
81 Tangowhisky : So is a Cessna150 against the A319 A 5-7% fuel efficient plane does not mean it has lower operating costs and revenue upside when ALL FACTORS are acc
82 Tangowhisky : No they don't. What I meant is that Airbus will not disclose all the benefits with the neo option all at once. They will provide as much information
83 Centre : Airlines that bought or will be buying the Cseries can compliment their engine choice by adding the higher capacity A320 and A321, i.e LH and F9 so f
84 JoeCanuck : OEW is one of the things that effects efficiency. Leahy specifically speaks of it when mentioning the CSeries. He says the 319 will be lighter. I don
85 Post contains images Tangowhisky : Agreed. My only point is that specs like OEW drive out operating costs. And in the end that is what most matters. But how often is commonality a non-
86 Stitch : The last OEW Bombardier let slip for the CS100 was 33.3t. The A319 is closer to 41t.
87 Post contains links DEVILFISH : Look again.....admittedly, it's also Leahy's job to confuse the competition..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...fer-neo-version-of-a318-leahy
88 PanAm788 : Interesting note: Boeing's stock has gone up 2.5% today, despite a 787 delay and an Airbus A320 NEO launch. Good for me since I'm a shareholder, but u
89 odwyerpw : I'm surprised at how subdued the announcement was. This is a HUGE deal..... I thought they might announce interior options, etc... with the NEO.....bu
90 Tangowhisky : Partnering up on aircraft programs is not like airlines partnering on routes. Bombardier is too far down the line to even appeal to Boeing. Besides B
91 Tangowhisky : Patience my friend. Patience. All in good time.
92 Post contains links and images OryCdg : Anything wrong in this article (or in this picture) ? "An Air France A320 taking off from Toulouse Blagnac" http://www.liberation.fr/economie/01...uve
93 keesje : To late to lead to a fruitfull partnership I guess. Embraer is sitting on the fence though and has expresssed ambitions to go beyond the E195.
94 CFBFrame : Hey, if he's talking so much about the CSeries he's doing it for one reason; airlines are comparing his offering to that a/c. He's trying to sign up c
95 Post contains links keesje : Not according to Delta. http://www.airliners.net/aviation-fo...eneral_aviation/read.main/4216912/ I believe there is a lot of hope from folks assumin
96 Post contains links DEVILFISH : A partnership could begin on the southern flank..... "Boeing proposes Embraer link in bid for Brazil contract" http://www.defense-aerospace.com/art..
97 CFBFrame : You may be right, but the current fight is not after the 321 it's a fight for 319/320s. Leahy is trying to defend his bread and butter.
98 CFBFrame : You better sell your stock if you see things as outlined in your post!!!
99 davs5032 : This is true. I think someone in this thread stated that the 319NEO would be lighter than the CS300. There is NO way that this is true. Smaller fusel
100 Post contains links 328JET : So, Airbus has provided the additional airframe weight (without engines, nacelles, pylons) for the NEO: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...fer-neo
101 Tangowhisky : Precisely. Whether they will form a partnership remains to be determined. But I m sure the two will sit together to explore this option. Embraer brin
102 Aesma : You're saying Boeing (or Airbus for that matter) can make an all new plane in 4 years ? Optimistic much ? I'm not sure I follow. The A318 is already
103 Tangowhisky : Bombardier will likely maintain that they will still have double digit direct operating costs savings with their CS300 against the A319neo. Airbus wi
104 Post contains links Aesma : New cabin launched in 2007 : New A320 Cabin Interior Introduced On Niki (by Keesje Mar 23 2007 in Civil Aviation) Condor first airline to retrofit it
105 Aesma : Or Airbus will just be able to deliver 10 times more planes per year.
106 DocLightning : IAE doesn't really "exist." It's a joint venture between RR, PW, and a few other companies. It's a paper company, basically. RR has no horse in the r
107 Aesma : The LEAP-X is a CFM engine !
108 Post contains links and images keesje : I think this has been a strategic option for years, I did a little research in 07 and proposed a 120-165 seater. Henry made a great artist impression
109 davs5032 : The A318 is not going to be included in the NEO program. If Airbus is hinting otherwise, it is purely a strategical move to further delay Airlines' de
110 PresRDC : Not sure you really understand what a joint venture actually entails. They are not "paper" companies by any stretch. For the record, CFMI is also a j
111 328JET : How should Boeing discount their B737s to compete with the NEO? Airbus will still offer the original A32x-family as lowcost option. So basically Boei
112 bravo1six : And can be a dangerous game to play. Many countries, as well as the WTO, have "anti-dumping" rules in place.
113 Tangowhisky : Sure and they will re-visit this option as part of their homework. Putting aside the 787 delays and the slow selling 748, Boeing's approach to launch
114 JoeCanuck : Boeing.com says the -900ER will do 3200 nm with 180 passengers. Airbus.com says the 321 with sharklets will do 3200nm with 185 passengers. I wouldn't
115 Tangowhisky : Giving discounted prices, spares, training, are not dumping. they are part of the package. Plus with 95% commonality, Airbus will amortize its costs
116 CFBFrame : See my answer below. By the way they have responded and the message is clear. Do all you want to have big fanfare, because this is the Airbus show!!!
117 Stitch : Depending on how many they sell, they may not have to. They've sold an entire year's worth of production in 2010. If they can keep that up going forw
118 Post contains links 328JET : The Thomas Cook Group has selected the A320-family as their sole narrowbody to reduce costs. The NEO is not mentioned in the article, but the A321NEO
119 328JET : You did not read my complete post 111...
120 packsonflight : When Boeing launches the 797 in 3 or 4 years from now with truckload of promises of improved economics, nobody will belive them because of the trackr
121 bravo1six : If the total package results in a price that is lower than the cost to produce, then yes it can be dumping. I'm not saying it is dumping, I'm saying
122 Stitch : I read it, but I asked myself why would any customer buy the A320 when the A320neo is said to be so much better (per the more ardent Airbus Aficiando
123 RoseFlyer : Be careful how you read Keesje's words. He is actually correct (and will show you a chart to prove his point that is a bit misleading), although in r
124 Post contains links jdevora : I think that they are doing an extra effort to keep it as "just new engines" * Less risk of delays * Keep commonality, only the engines are new (if y
125 328JET : I agree with you, but maybe the request to offer both variants is airline-driven.
126 packsonflight : What are they going to call the 320 NEO? 320-300?
127 Post contains links and images Pihero : ILFC doesn't expect a Boeing answer for another six months. And nobody expects a brand new design as the technology (materials + engines ) won't allo
128 Tangowhisky : Very difficult to prove given how these deals are made. Furthermore Airbus can do exactly what Embraer did to Bombardier when Bombardier took Embraer
129 Stitch : It's more than just passengers - the A321-200 can lift four tons more total payload than a 737-900ER. It can also fly 250nm farther at maximum struct
130 ikramerica : It's the same straw man type of argument he used for a long time re: the 747-8. He said that because the A380 has wider Y seats, it's only right to p
131 328JET : And he is right about that! The airlines feel the same and order A380/B777 instead of. The B748I has a 9,5 y-seat cabin only.
132 JoeCanuck : If your primary purpose is to haul passengers, it seems like a pretty good metric to me. By the way, where can I get those numbers?
133 Post contains links Stitch : www.airbus.com/en www.boeing.com/commercial You'll want to look for the "Airplane Characteristics for Airport Planning" documents.
134 JoeCanuck : Thanks. I was playing around in there. I went with the specs that each company was touting in their specs pages.
135 Delimit : A 9.5 seat cabin?
136 Post contains images bravo1six : So we've very quickly gone from "it's not dumping" to "very difficult to prove" to "even if BBD could prove it they won't take on Airbus". What was t
137 Post contains images 328JET : The width of the cabin in comparison to the B777 and A388 is too small to allow comparable seat comfort with 10 y-seats. Therefore, in todays industr
138 Post contains images FlyNWA727 : Give me a break! In Boeing's 94 year history, the 787 debacle has undoubtedly been their biggest blunder... especially when you look at the last 20 y
139 328JET : What i am wondering about: How many cancelations will we see now for the "old" A32x-family and the B737NG?
140 planemaker : Yes, technically it is government to government but the practical battle is actually aircraft maker vs aircraft maker using their respective governme
141 Delimit : With an EIS of 2016+...none? And that bit about seat width is absurd.
142 CFBFrame : Why would they do it so soon? There's a natural 5 year window. Why would there be any?
143 Post contains images bravo1six : Chances are - none. A customer who has signed up for either likely doesn't have any right to cancel. Some recent A32x customers might have been given
144 ikramerica : You obviously are Keesje with an alias, because no other person makes and defends this argument. No airline is going to put 9Y on a 747, and for many
145 Post contains images 328JET : You know that airlines find a lot of ways to get out of contracts if they really want... No, i am not. Keesje is dutch, i am german. (The netherlands
146 Stitch : Unlikely many. As noted. tjhe A320neo is five years away - and this assumes CFM and P&W have engines ready by then, since they are the ones drivi
147 RayChuang : I do think that JetBlue (B6) will very soon become an A320 NEO customer, if only to allow the A320 planes to fly non-stop between JFK and the US West
148 Tangowhisky : I guess I should have qualified my phrase with "If there were any allegations, then......" Which is why WTO disputes within the aerospace sector has
149 BMI727 : Probably none. Maybe a few customers towards the end of the A320 backlog will convert. And too many conversions could hurt Airbus, since it would hur
150 328JET : I know, but i believe that Keesje is dutch as his flag and name shows.
151 Post contains images airbazar : The fact that a 20 year old airplane is eating up it's market share and rumor has it that it may even be superior to it for some missions. I think th
152 flyorski : What aircraft are you referring to?
153 Ferpe : The question of a new design relies heavily when the game-changing technologies (laminar flow wings, open rotor engines) are ready for prime time. Onl
154 rheinwaldner : Very bad strategy. It made Airbus big. Nothing else. We can see that if we quickly check the outcome of the opposing strategy: the A320 would never h
155 parapente : I guess everbody has their own agenda and I am no different.For me the NEO project has always been about the 320 and 321.I feel the 2010 Airbus busine
156 Post contains images ElbowRoom : Airbus was covering the segment that would be best addressed by a 5-abreast aircraft (say 120-150 seats), with a pair of 6 abreast aircraft: the A318
157 Aesma : Well, I only flew the 744 once (return) and I clearly wasn't impressed by the comfort of a 10 abreast Y seat to say the least ! In fact I spent most
158 RoseFlyer : I think some airlines might go from A320 to NEO, however I don't see airlines being eager to switch existing 737 orders since they would lose their d
159 SEPilot : Boeing has trashed their reputation of delivering on schedule; it remains to be seen whether or not they have also damaged their reputation for deliv
160 JerseyFlyer : Yes, BUT it qualifies this with "Excluding engines, nacelles and pylons" which will surely add weight additionally.
161 Tangowhisky : I would not say that Boeing's strategy on new product launches are bad. They have done very well with the 744, 777, 737NG, and once out of the 787 ce
162 328JET : I would not say so automatically. - The pylon weight might be unchanged, because of smaller dimensions. - The engine is likely to be heavier. - The n
163 PlanesNTrains : He asked NG vs NEO. Not sure why you went in another direction? I do think it's interesting that Airbus will be competing with itself - offering a di
164 rheinwaldner : Because it does not cost a lot. Like the A340 which is also still on offer. Leahy said in audio stream that he does not believe that many old A320 wi
165 Post contains links rheinwaldner : Program cost seems to be 1bn €. (from here http://de.reuters.com/article/topNews/idDEBEE6B100K20101202 ) The A320NEO seems to be the simplistic low-
166 SEPilot : I have to disagree with your analysis. The 737 Classic was in service about the same time the A320 was launched, so it could hardly be a "counter" to
167 JoeCanuck : Somehow, Boeing managed to compete with the 320 quite nicely after they put a new wing, new pylons, new engines, modified gear, significantly new coc
168 tdscanuck : Nacelles have been on the forefront of materials technology for a long time...they went CFRP long before almost anything else. I'm not sure what mate
169 Post contains images Stitch : I just can't help but chuckle at the Airbus Aficiandoes and their fervent wishes that come 2015, Boeing will be lucky to deliver one 777 and a dozen 7
170 Post contains images BMI727 : So now Boeing shouldn't build new planes because it might jeopardize the meager number of sales they have left? Does Boeing still employ psychics? I
171 Stitch : I have absolutely no doubts whatsoever that the A320neo will be a popular airplane. But even if it was so popular as to secure 75% of the annual orde
172 328JET : I think the A319NEO and A320NEO are not really dangerous for Boeing. With good prizing the B737-700W and B737-800W could be sold in good numbers for a
173 Post contains images planemaker : In September B announced another rate hike.... to 38 737s/month in 2nd Qtr. 2013. Yikes!! Even without "good pricing" the 737s will nevertheless sell
174 packsonflight : If there is a High demand for the NEO, then Airbus can keep the discounts to a mininum and sell fewer planes but with higher revenues per unit. That
175 Post contains links mdword1959 : Aircastle unimpressed by Airbus A320NEO http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...unimpressed-by-airbus-a320neo.html BTW, is the author of this article t
176 Stitch : Yes, but that means Airbus can only continue to deliver around 40 planes a month and therefore Boeing should see stable demand for the 737 to continu
177 airbazar : Not any different from the Boeing fans really. I don't think Boeing's survival is at stake at all, that would be ridiculous, however market share is.
178 planemaker : A shift, yes, but there can be no "exodus" because of production limitations... and the fact that if Boeing does not "NEO", an all-new 737 will be ar
179 Stitch : The A300 was more of a threat to early DC-10 and L-1011 models then it was anything in Boeing's lineup, since their model line was empty between the
180 JoeCanuck : Which didn't really seem to hurt Boeing since they sold almost 2000 Classics.
181 XT6Wagon : Yes, Clearly Boeing was shocked when Airbus launched a poor selling widebody with 1,000nm passenger only range. Don't confuse the later A300 versions
182 Pihero : And why was it that the classic could resist the A320 challenge ? Wasn't it that the 'Bus was certified on the new, more stringent ( i.e safer ) regu
183 packsonflight : It is not about knocking them out, it is about making money. I am saying Airbus can deliver their 40 frames per month and sell them with much greater
184 JoeCanuck : Actually, I didn't forget to mention it because it is not what I was talking about. I was speaking of the relative work required for each maker to NE
185 Stitch : I'd argue it didn't. I would imagine Boeing didn't expect to have to replace the 737 Classic in 10 years. But it's not really unique to the 737 - or
186 Pihero : Semantics, semantics, as usual... Not one of these aircraft had been given -by the new regs- any advantage over the competition...except the 737 agai
187 RoseFlyer : The A320 and 737 Classic were quite different. In some areas, the A320 was far better. It has longer range, more payload and more capacity. However i
188 JoeCanuck : What was the performance penalty?
189 packsonflight : The Airbus 320 was certified under a diffrent set of rules which made the aircraft less capaple on paper than the 737NG. The performance certicicatio
190 Post contains links tdscanuck : Except for the minor detail that that's not true. The 737NG was certified to the FAR's up through amendment 25-77 (which includes amendment 25-42), w
191 Pihero : ...and you might add : "the ONLY aircraft certified under this rule as NPRM 93-8 followed, which became the standard airworthiness certification crit
192 Pihero : It's probably a typo, Tom or packsonflight writing too quickly : Of course the airplane concerned with my initial comment were the series 200,300, 40
193 Stitch : The 737 Classic received her go-ahead in March 1981 (with the 737-300 model), while the A320 was launched in March 1984. The 737-300 received FAA cert
194 Pihero : Amendment FAR 25-42 was effective in Mach 1978, and by right should have been applied to the "Classics". But no,there was no retroactivity to the ame
195 tdscanuck : No, they amend the FARs every year. But it's not that simple...when you apply for a type certificate (or amended type certificate), you have to tell
196 Pihero : Tom, Thanks for a comprehensive explanation. In this paragraph you wrote, what would be the relevant FAR as I've always been lost in the maze of those
197 Stitch : Understood. But I admit to being confused by which metrics we are discussing when we say "performance". I've read what packsonflight said about Amend
198 tdscanuck : There are quite a few, but a couple would be 25.145 (longitudinal control), 25.147 (directional and lateral control), 25.161 (trim), 25.231 (longitud
199 rheinwaldner : Nobody said that. B.t.w. you assume that there would be no 737NEO. Personally I consider that as unlikely now. IMO Boeing will be forced soon to brin
200 keesje : I think the interesting question is what engines will be available for the Boeing Y1, and what fuselage efficiency improvements that will render an im
201 Post contains images brendows : I'd say that the 767 didn't attract many new orders even before the 787 was announced because it already was close to the end of its life cycle. How
202 Asiaflyer : Which planet do you live on? 40% growth over some years is no problems to deal with. Plenty of large companies (including the one I work for) are pla
203 Post contains links parapente : Perhaps the decision to launch the NEO is right and indeed a potental decision for Boeing to follow (with a slightly lower bypass version) is right to
204 Stitch : It's one thing to double the production rate of a consumer electronics item like an iPad. It's quite another to double the production rate of a compl
205 RoseFlyer : It doesn't matter how good your airplane is, recessions will hit and cause demand to go down. Orders will fall and airlines will defer deliveries in
206 art : I appreciate that the whole supply chain has to ramp up for production to increase but in terms of assembly capacity, is the Tianjin plant not design
207 JoeCanuck : Both Boeing and Airbus limit production to limit their liabilities when the next downturn comes. They both want a steady, well trained and reliable wo
208 Post contains images astuteman : [ That's about as exciting as I think it gets, too Whilst I don't disagree, I think airframers and their suppliers will be extremely cautious of spend
209 Pihero : Boy, you've hardly scratched the surface of those performance penalties ! Let's just say in very simple terms that, on short(-ish) or hot (-ish) clim
210 JoeCanuck : Not to be negative since much of this is interesting but it really doesn't have much effect on any NEO prospects. Since its inception, Airbus has sol
211 Tangowhisky : You are right. But this gives them an opportunity to even have a better family of aircraft. I think the NEO is a shot at the bow of the Cseries, but
212 Post contains images Asiaflyer : Isn't that what Boeing is considering now by increasing 777 production from 7 to 10 frames/month, i.e. +42%? Havn't seen many people arguing about th
213 flash330 : If i was Airbus i'd rather regret putting new engines on the A320 than regret not doing it. much easier to cancel a program no wants then conjure one
214 XT6Wagon : It takes between 1 and 3 years to get a part from the time its ordered to the time its delivered. This is why rate increases are so far out of the an
215 Scipio : A thought: the fact that the differences between OEO and NEO will be kept minimal does not mean that there will be no further improvements that are c
216 Post contains links mffoda : Ryanair is not thrilled with A320NEO..... http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...ir-not-grabbed-by-the-a320neo.html Quote: Airbus' decision to launch
217 keesje : From the interview Millar describes this as a "very interesting development", but he believes the timeframe is "lengthy" and that the money would be
218 parapente : He clearly feels that it is aggressive - with everything else going on.I don't know why he says this really.The only aggressive part has nothing to do
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 To Launch ''New'' HGW A330-300 (235T) posted Thu Nov 25 2010 03:51:14 by WINGS
Airbus To Relaunch A320 Winglet Tests posted Sat Sep 13 2008 03:42:25 by Aviationbuff
Airbus To Double A320 Lifespan posted Wed Jan 2 2008 00:47:34 by Flying-Tiger
Airbus To Build A320 Completely In Hamburg posted Mon Jan 15 2007 15:53:45 by LHStarAlliance
WSJ: Airbus To Boost A320 Series Production posted Mon Nov 20 2006 06:46:56 by PanAm_DC10
Rumors from Airbus to launch a new program: A305 posted Fri Jan 2 2004 11:00:55 by AZMD80
AirAsia Defers 8 More A320; Airbus To Cut Prod'n? posted Sun Oct 4 2009 17:41:04 by Flybeq400
AerCap Launch A320 Airbus Freighter Conversion posted Wed Jul 16 2008 03:25:27 by PanAm_DC10
Airbus To Upgrade Current A320 posted Wed Mar 22 2006 18:53:16 by OyKIE
Airbus To Select City For Chinese A320 Line. March posted Sun Feb 19 2006 23:59:39 by Keesje