Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus A350 XWB, 2011, Progress, 5-6 Month Delay?  
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33421 times:

2011 will see the completion of the final assembly line in TLS, while first major structural parts are getting shipped by the supply chain. Lot's of milestones and challenges ahead for Airbus in 2011.

The first Trent XWB originally was to be installed around this time under A380 Msn1 for flight testing early 2011. According an EADS update early this month is has already moved to mid 2011, suggesting a slip of ~5-6 months. Unclear is, if this is because of RR Trent issues or a other complications. I think some design freezes were already delayed earlier because of material trade-offs and vendor selection.

http://blog.seattlepi.com/aerospace/library/a350firstbarrelbig.jpg
Mandrel showing the A350XWBs egg shaped cross section, top panel
Latest

From EADS : Credit Suisse conference, 1 December 2010, Nathalie Errard;

Progress in manufacturing for A350 XWB-900 version:
   Freeze of development aircraft
   Freeze of all systems interfaces
   All systems Critical Design Reviews are well progressing
   Systems entering qualification
   Iron bird: preparation power on and pressure on

First engine test:
   Trent XWB will fly on an A380 flying test bed mid 2011
   A350-1000 thrust level demonstrated

Right balance between time and quality
   Key operational efficiency drivers under proactive risk management:
   Design stability and quality; systems qualification to enable maturity at first flight
   Risk sharing partner and supply chain performance
   Maturity of manufacturing processes
   Schedule; buffer built in our ramp-up plan with regards to customer commitments and industrial capacity

Next major programme milestone
   FAL start in 2011
   Entry into service in H2 2013

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z...eesje_pics/A350ProgressDec2010.jpg

http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z160/keesje_pics/a350lookthrough.jpg

113 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33381 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Mandrel showing the A350XWBs egg shaped cross section, top panel

Thanks for the picture. How is the A330 platform shaped, and for that matter B787?


User currently offlinestitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 29678 posts, RR: 84
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33320 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Well with the Trent 900 and Trent 1000 experiencing issues, if nothing else I could see Rolls spending some more bench time on the Trent XWB, especially since it is a more complicated engine (since it is the first Trent with a two-stage IP turbine) and it is the first Trent with BLISKs.

Airbus has been pushing EIS farther and farther back in 2013 due (at least in part) to redesign work on lightning protection and condensation issues.


User currently offlineER757 From Cayman Islands, joined May 2005, 2431 posts, RR: 7
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33270 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
EADS update early this month is has already moved to mid 2011, suggesting a slip of ~5-6 months.

If that holds true, I'll applaud them. A delay of that length on a project as new to them as this would be negligible.


User currently offlinetdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33237 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Next major programme milestone
FAL start in 2011
Entry into service in H2 2013

How in the world is first flight not a major program milestone? I appreciate you're just reporting from the conference, but that certainly seems like it should have been in there.

Tom.


User currently offlineDLPMMM From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 3580 posts, RR: 10
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 33223 times:

There will be more delays. Figure on 2015 for EIS.

Not a slam at Airbus in particular.

Neither Airbus nor Boeing are capable of delivering a development program on time due to their bureaucratic organizational structures and the lack of responsibility found at each level in the engineering chains of command.


User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9375 posts, RR: 52
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 32841 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Design stability and quality; systems qualification to enable maturity at first flight

Does anyone know what that means? EASA won't let them fly without system qualification (safety of flight letters) prior to first flight. Are they implying that all parts will be fully qualified before first flight? That's an extremely risk averse way to handle flight test and would be incredible if they could actually fly with fully qualified parts on the first flight. That certainly has never happened on airplane programs I am familiar with.

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Schedule; buffer built in our ramp-up plan with regards to customer commitments and industrial capacity

That sounds like a direct action to not have a repeat of the custom designs on the A380 of each customer which caused production problems.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2154 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 32559 times:

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 5):
There will be more delays. Figure on 2015 for EIS.

Not a slam at Airbus in particular.

Neither Airbus nor Boeing are capable of delivering a development program on time due to their bureaucratic organizational structures and the lack of responsibility found at each level in the engineering chains of command.

I agree on this one 100%, the problem with A and B is that they used to be lean and had more competitors, on top of that, sales where nowhere as large as they are today.

A and B know they have huge backlogs and they are dancing together to keep up with each other and to assure the market as a duopoly.

If the 787 is cancelled and the A350 has tons of problems, cannot meet specs or promised performance, who will the Carriers run to?
Even more, the economy has been real slow these past 2 years and will continue for at least a year (if the dollar or Euro collapses I guess for a decade), so everyone is sticking to their guns and A and B can delay their products shamelessly blaming the tooth fairy if necesary.
In 2004 I remember the thread about the A380 and the flamewar that ensued, I wonder what would be written here if the same stone throwing circa 2004-2005 was allowed here.
With the problems with RR engines I would not be surprised if the delay was like a year just for powerplant problems.

Regards
TRB



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5318 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 32522 times:

There hasn't been much news on the 350 except for the occasional 'we built the first of something', normal update stuff.

Until something specific is announced to mark a significant delay, I don't see why it can't be assumed that the program is basically on track.



What the...?
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 32478 times:

Good news!

I just found two detailed progress updates, 5 weeks old.

Lots of information, figures & photo's. Market projections, risks, progress.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5001/5286518230_1789724a17_b.jpg

http://www.eads.com/dms/eads/int/en/...s/GIF2010/GIF_Praesi/F_Bregier.pdf

http://www.eads.com/dms/eads/int/en/.../GIF2010/GIF_Praesi2/Ph_Launay.pdf


User currently offlineLAXDESI From United States of America, joined May 2005, 5086 posts, RR: 48
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 32278 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 9):
I just found two detailed progress updates, 5 weeks old.

Excellent find.

As per the link,
Airbus expects Boeing to dominate the 250 seater market with its 788 over A358 and A332.
Airbus expects to dominate Boeing in the 300 seater market with its A359/A333 over B789/B772.

I tend to concur with the above forecast. It is not clear to me what the results will be for the 350 seater market, where the A350-10 and the 77W( and 777NG) will compete. Airbus expects a demand of nearly 700 aircraft in this category over the next two decades.


User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 31921 times:

looking at it the picture I used in reply 9 could be the EK bar area..

User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4593 posts, RR: 38
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 31821 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting keesje (Reply 9):
Good news!

I just found two detailed progress updates, 5 weeks old.

Lots of information, figures & photo's. Market projections, risks, progress.


Thanks for digging this up and thanks for the comprehensive overview on the A350-XWB program.  .


User currently offlinestarrion From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 1122 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 31260 times:

It's good to see that Airbus is being proactive in announcing their delays.

With as much heat as RR is in right now, I wouldn't blame them for taking extra time to make sure the engine comes out clean. They can't afford to be the scapegoat for another project getting delayed.



Knowledge Replaces Fear
User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3320 posts, RR: 4
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 30953 times:

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 5):
There will be more delays. Figure on 2015 for EIS.

Not a slam at Airbus in particular.

Part of Airbus's problems will be shared suppliers burning time fixing/updating thier products for the 787. Both buy massive amounts of engineered parts from outside companies, so when one of these outside suppliers has issues, both get hit.


User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 30946 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 14):
Part of Airbus's problems will be shared suppliers burning time fixing/updating thier products for the 787. Both buy massive amounts of engineered parts from outside companies, so when one of these outside suppliers has issues, both get hit.

Could be truth. But they are warned, looking at A350 XWB supply chain we see Spirit in and Alenia out, guess who passed the exams..


User currently offlinecomorin From United States of America, joined May 2005, 4869 posts, RR: 16
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 30421 times:

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Key operational efficiency drivers under proactive risk management

Semantically-challenged sentences like this get me worried. I'm sure it means something. It just worries me that someone at Airbus actually thinks that way.


User currently offlinepanais From Cyprus, joined May 2008, 446 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 29359 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 10):
It is not clear to me what the results will be for the 350 seater market, where the A350-10 and the 77W( and 777NG) will compete.

What might complicate matters will be the strategy that Boeing might take with regards to the 777 upgrade and any decision to go for the hypothetical 777-400NG.

Might also interesting to see if Airbus launches a stretch of the A350-1000 to close the gap between the A350 and the A380.


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4482 posts, RR: 22
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 29309 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 16):
Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Key operational efficiency drivers under proactive risk management

Semantically-challenged sentences like this get me worried. I'm sure it means something. It just worries me that someone at Airbus actually thinks that way.

LOL. Gotta love MBA-speak from someone who would probably never be caught dead on a factory floor. Heaven forbid.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 6):
Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Design stability and quality; systems qualification to enable maturity at first flight

Does anyone know what that means? EASA won't let them fly without system qualification (safety of flight letters) prior to first flight. Are they implying that all parts will be fully qualified before first flight? That's an extremely risk averse way to handle flight test and would be incredible if they could actually fly with fully qualified parts on the first flight. That certainly has never happened on airplane programs I am familiar with.

I would think that's more of that good old MBA speak. I've never seen systems "perfected" to "maturity" before an all-up test in the actual airplane.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 11919 posts, RR: 25
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 5 days ago) and read 29167 times:

Quoting ER757 (Reply 3):
If that holds true, I'll applaud them. A delay of that length on a project as new to them as this would be negligible.

Yet not in scope with what John Leahy said a few short years ago:

Quote:

On production of the future A350 mid-sized jet, which is due in 2013, Airbus is determined to avoid a repetition of two-year production delays on the A380 super-jumbo and is monitoring its rival's progress on the delayed Boeing 787 Dreamliner. "Having gone through the A380, learning from our mistakes, watching what is happening with the 787 and coming out four years after the 787, I think we should all be shot for gross incompetence if we have another screw-up in the A350 programme," Leahy said. "I'm sure we'll be on target."

Remember all the statements at program launch time about having put in enough buffer in the schedule so they would not have issues like A380 or B787? The cost of getting the A380 and A400M seems to be being borne by the A350 program. A few months ago, Tom Enders said all buffer in the program had been used up. Given they are years away from EIS, that is not a good thing.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1462 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 28577 times:

Quoting LAXDESI (Reply 10):
As per the link,
Airbus expects Boeing to dominate the 250 seater market with its 788 over A358 and A332.
Airbus expects to dominate Boeing in the 300 seater market with its A359/A333 over B789/B772.

I tend to concur with the above forecast. It is not clear to me what the results will be for the 350 seater market, where the A350-10 and the 77W( and 777NG) will compete. Airbus expects a demand of nearly 700 aircraft in this category over the next two decades.

IMO, the A358 doesn't compete with the 788 but the 789. So, I see it like this:
788 competes with the A332, where the 788 has only a small advantage now. But that advantage will grow unless Airbus starts a A332NEO (which is highly unlikely);
789 competes with A358, advantage 789;
A359 competes with... eh what exactly? 77E? No competition. 7810? Only when it will be launched, and even then the A359 should have the advantage, it's the baseline model vs a double stretch.
A3510 should have the edge over any 773NG.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 19):
Remember all the statements at program launch time about having put in enough buffer in the schedule so they would not have issues like A380 or B787? The cost of getting the A380 and A400M seems to be being borne by the A350 program. A few months ago, Tom Enders said all buffer in the program had been used up. Given they are years away from EIS, that is not a good thing.

No, not a good thing. Buffer should be spread out from the start of the program until EIS. And it has been more than used up, EIS of the A359 has already been delayed half a year until H2 2013. So, unless the A350 program doesn't hit any unexpected snags from now on, it's not unrealistic to see the A359 EIS early 2014, the A358 one year later. And if the A350-1000, originally planned to EIS at the end of 2015, will be into revenue service before 2017, that would be almost miraculous.



146,318/19/20/21,AB6,332,343,345,388,722,732/3/4/5/G/8,9,742,74E,744,752,762,763,772,77E,773,77W,AT3,ATP,E90,F50/70,M11,
User currently offlinekeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 27956 times:

Quoting comorin (Reply 16):
Semantically-challenged sentences like this get me worried.

I had that feeling already seeing :

Quoting keesje (Thread starter):
Right balance between time and quality

IMO quality is a required given and you schedule time accordingly. If you start balancing them time is the one moving.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 20):
IMO, the A358 doesn't compete with the 788 but the 789. So, I see ...... have the edge over any 773NG.

Leahy gave a presentation too and added up the twin aisles altogether. A330+A350 vs 787+777. Smartly "since the A350 was launched". Marketing. Boeing similarly prefers to look back 30-40 years to make comparisons.

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5284/5286500666_b5cde6fa3b_b.jpg


User currently offlineAirNZ From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 27618 times:

Quoting DLPMMM (Reply 5):
There will be more delays. Figure on 2015 for EIS.

Not a slam at Airbus in particular.

Neither Airbus nor Boeing are capable of delivering a development program on time due to their bureaucratic organizational structures and the lack of responsibility found at each level in the engineering chains of command.

This is merely an uniformed opinion and nothing more. Therefore it should be stated as such.


User currently offlineglideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1593 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 27495 times:

Quoting keesje (Reply 15):
Could be truth. But they are warned, looking at A350 XWB supply chain we see Spirit in and Alenia out, guess who passed the exams..

IMO, Alenia should be out of everything for A & B. Period.

[Edited 2010-12-24 04:23:28]

[Edited 2010-12-24 04:24:00]


To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
User currently offlinepanais From Cyprus, joined May 2008, 446 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 26497 times:

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 20):
788 competes with the A332, where the 788 has only a small advantage now. But that advantage will grow unless Airbus starts a A332NEO (which is highly unlikely);

Agree, however I do not see this as a big market. This segment will go the way of the B767-200 with 249 build vs the 757 for the B767-300. This segment will also go the way of the A340-200 with 28 build vs the A340-300 with 218 build.

My opinion is that a lot of the B787-8 orders will be converted to the B787-9.

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 20):
789 competes with A358, advantage 789;

My opinion is that these two will be very equal planes.


25 JerseyFlyer : I think the speculated current delay to re-specify the engines for the A350-1000 is significant here - any stretch beyond the -1000 would surely requ
26 DLPMMM : I've dealt with both companies and their suppliers in development programs. Have you?
27 LAXDESI : If the 788 were sold at a steep discount, then Boeing may be unwilling to convert them to 789 at similar discounts. Airlines may be forced to stick t
28 stitch : The A330-200 passenger market is closing on 600 frames worth of orders, which seems like a fairly big market to me and one that both Boeing's and Airb
29 Ferpe : It is interessting to see the difference in philosphie of A and B when it comes to main model and stretch/longer range ones. It was probably discussed
30 Post contains links keesje : I think the A350-900R is going to be the longest range variant (~2016). Probably further weakening the business case for the -800. It depends a bit o
31 stitch : I do not believe the A350-900R will ever be launched. ULR ops are just economically unviable unless you configure the plane only for premium cabins a
32 BMI727 : I agree that the -800 is probably something of the odd man out in the A350 range and has a relatively narrow appeal. I think that the potentially bet
33 stitch : widebodyphotog ran the numbers awhile back through flight-planning software.
34 rcair1 : Unfortunately - prolly somebody at Airbus (and I'm sure there are equivalents at Boeing) probably think this sounds sophisticated and good. I would s
35 keesje : I think the -900R could become interesting not because of its maximum range but because of additional payload potential from Asia to Europe, Transpaci
36 stitch : You'd think more airlines would be adding 777-200LR's then, since it is unmatched in payload-range and it is also a very efficient airplane in it's o
37 Post contains images Hamlet69 : IMO, it's not going to take the "R" version to do that. As we all know, Airbus this year 'standardized' the design of the -800 to more closely align
38 Post contains images keesje : You should have quoted the last sentence too The 777-200LR is a very heavy aircraft compared to similar seat-cargo capacity twins. OEWs: - 777-200 LR
39 stitch : True, but that is why it doesn't need to leave behind cargo, which was your comment. It has enough structure to support a high enough MTOW to lift al
40 flyglobal : My magic crystal ball 'showing' that Airbus will re-engine the A330's at the end to compete with the 787-8 and partly -9. Engines will be GE GenX, as
41 Scipio : Back to the A330-200Lite, with an EIS 10-15 years after the concept was originally shelved?
42 XT6Wagon : I think the 777-300ER Vs 777-200LR is what is front and center in airlines thinking right now. The LR has impressive abilities, but the 300ER gives u
43 abba : Wonder how many resources and funds a re-engine of the 330 will take? I know that to put new engines on is no trivial matter; however it seems to be
44 JoeCanuck : Airbus is quoting at least 1 billion Euros to re-engine the 320...and they are taking 5 years to do it. I can't imagine a 330NEO would cost less than
45 Post contains links and images keesje : The cost would be no less then the A320 neo. Timing of the A320 NEO seems to be dictated by resources, (lack of) competition and the current A320 bac
46 Burkhard : I wonder the following. The A330 ( and the 747 or 767 too ) have been certified for several ( three) engines in the beginning. Did this add billions
47 JoeCanuck : If Airbus is resource constrained with the 320NEO, doing a 330NEO would only make the matters worse. As it is, Airbus hasn't uttered a peep about re-e
48 cygnuschicago : Considering the disastrous reception the A350Mk1 received from customers and analysts (and of course the armchair CEOs on this site), why on earth wou
49 A380900 : Wouldn't it make more sense to wait until they know what the 787 can do before making a decision on re-engining the A330? If the 787 is weak, they'll
50 tdscanuck : Yes, it added to the development costs at the time (probably not billions, given how long ago the 747-400 and 767 were done). Doing it at the beginni
51 stitch : Each A350 model is about three meters longer than it's corresponding 787 model, so you're looking at three rows of Economy seats (27) or less than 10
52 nomadd22 : Not to mention lower mantenance costs, longer check intervals and more modern just about everything else.
53 panais : If the A330NEO will be available sometime in 2017, the main question would be, why on earth would an airline want to buy it if the A350-800 will offe
54 JBirdAV8r : -Existing fleet commonality -Significantly lower acquisition cost -Better maintenance/parts/spares support etc...
55 stitch : If Airbus wants 10% more for an A320neo, asking the same (or more) for an A330neo would wipe out most of the cost differential. GE would also be deman
56 Post contains links jdevora : That is the last thing I read about that idea: Engine makers vie for A330F contract Looks like it wasn't an easy task after all... Cheers JD
57 SchorschNG : I think when the A350-1000 comes, the R-model more or less comes for free. It is the same weight as the -1000 in the -900 fuselage length. I don't th
58 stitch : I agree there is no technical reason for Airbus not to develop it, I just don't believe there is a financial one. It won't be anymore "free" than the
59 Post contains links keesje : Years ago the A350-900R was offered to BA and QF for LHR-SYD flights. http://news.flightmapping.com/07/07/...london-to-sydney-flights_1393.html One in
60 stitch : I doubt we will see non-stop LHR-SYD flight because you can only do it with an all-premium cabin (if a 77L can't carry an economic two or three class
61 JoeCanuck : How much time would a LHR-SYD flight take...in both directions?
62 Post contains images Hamlet69 : I'm not entirely convinced even Airbus ever saw it that light. And I really don't believe they do now, after the changes. If airlines are beginning t
63 Post contains links LAXDESI : Here's some numbers from my threads in the technical forum with each aircraft under the assumption of a 4,000 nm mission: A332 0.0192 gallon/seat mil
64 SchorschNG : Let's see how the market develops. If fuel prices spike, we might also see a general decline in all-cargo operations. I think the option to go -900R
65 panais : Actually it exactly matches the A320 family. One family, one pilot certification, etc. Personally, I expect to see more A350-800 sold than the A350-1
66 JerseyFlyer : ....and thereby substitute any further 777F orders from FX / 5X!!
67 BMI727 : At this point, I think that Airbus and their customers are best served by using resources to keep the A350 on time and on spec. How do you figure tha
68 nomadd22 : Maybe he meant "knowing that the A380 would have no freighter because the 748 decision was made"
69 stitch : Well 5X at least has a heavy-cargo division, to they'd have to add the 77F. As for FX, they appear to love the 77F so I expect them to add more, as w
70 SchorschNG : I doubt that. The A350-800 does offer only marginally better range at slightly lower trip costs. Most airlines will prefer to use the larger aircraft
71 XT6Wagon : Agreed, the A359 will offer far more flexiblity in a fleet with a near trival difference in trip costs. Higher resale will cover the gap in intial pr
72 trex8 : maybe they should market a A358 lite, some airlines may not need the range or want the heavy weights of the A359 and want something to replace lower w
73 stitch : The A350-800 was supposed to be lighter than it will be. Airbus had to drop the design refinements and just make it a straight frame shrink of the A3
74 LAXDESI : I would like to know the original OEW estimate for A358 and A359, and the most recent estimate on OEW. I have used 270,000 lbs. as OEW in my analysis
75 panais : Thanks for making my point on the A350-800. There is a market for it after all. Why would an airline have the A350-900 and the B787-8? This should co
76 XT6Wagon : No, you are missing that Airlines have discovered that the nearly identical tripcost for the larger 773ER vs 772LR means they can either discount the
77 BMI727 : The second part should probably have the caveat that they have relatively small fleets (under 15-20 frames or so) and probably operate other variants
78 328JET : And, according to your logic, why did airlines order both the B787-8 and B787-9?
79 LAXDESI : As per wiki, Qatar and Aeroflot have ordered both the A358 and B788. Does anyone remember the reasoning behind ordering similarly matched aircraft? Bo
80 Post contains images panais : So you are making the assumption that the A350-800 and the A350-900 will have identical tripcosts and they have not even been build yet. An excellent
81 Post contains links panais : Price. They were offered at a price that no Al Baker or Russian middleman could refuse. http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...1/04/351323/787-pricin
82 LAXDESI : That could explain the orders for B788. Am I correct in assuming that they were not offered B789 with similar discounts? Or did it have more to do wi
83 panais : Correct. Read the articles. Very interesting on the part of the Boeing assumptions, which as far as pricing is concerned, they were very misguided.
84 Post contains links and images keesje : The reasons I could see a business case for the A330NEo vs the A350-800; - An A350-900F is far away - An A350 MRTT is far away - Commonlity with 1500
85 stitch : Airbus has never said and I have seen numbers all over the board. The only "official" number I have heard is an MEW between 116 and 118t for the A350
86 LAXDESI : The real competition for A332 (or A332 NEO) is likely to be B788 for B767/A332 replacement market. For a 4,000nm mission, A332 will burn 2,000 gallon
87 Post contains images Stitch : You'd still deride it, stating it is a poor cargo carrier compared to the A330-200 since it cannot take LD3 at two-abreat and that it's CASM was too
88 XT6Wagon : Perhaps you are unaware that all of them did so when the A358 wasn't a simple shrink, but had its own unique parts to optimize for its size. This mad
89 Post contains images EPA001 : Probably she has, but the latest reports on flightglobal suggest that the B789-timeline (development & EIS)might be even more changed then the B7
90 Stitch : I'd be surprised if Boeing is planning significant design changes to the 787-9 unless in consultation with customers they have decided to go bigger a
91 328JET : That could be a dangerous strategy for the 789 as several airlines ordered both 789s and 359s. If the 789 is delayed after EIS of the 359, it woul ma
92 panais : I am also aware that none of them canceled their A350-800 orders, which allows me to conclude that it is still a great plane even as a shrink. Fully
93 Stitch : The A350-800 is even worse than a 787-8 by those criteria. Considering both are larger than an A330-200 and should be similar in weight, when I look
94 Post contains links keesje : Sometime ago Steven Udvar Hazy said the 787-9 is 6,350 kg overweight. Last month ANZ CEO Rob Fy siad they are concerned about 787-9 OEW increase. The
95 panais : Agree on the "too heavy for medium range". I think it will make an excellent aircraft for those long range trips. To me this is going to be one of th
96 Stitch : Both the A350-800 and 787-8 offer two more LD3 positions than the A330-200, which helps balance out the additional luggage those two to three dozen e
97 SchorschNG : No need to do so. The -900 comes out first, if the -800 isn't that great, you'll go for the -900. I think many people will switch to the larger model
98 panais : I did some research and the A330-200 can carry 278 (Emirates), 283 (Air China) 295 (Air Berlin) and 303 (Jetstar) in 2 class configuration, 287 (KLM)
99 Post contains links and images keesje : In the news: Nice picture of the A350 including new carpet integrated LEDs. Could be included in any cabin I guess. OEM always love to leave out the c
100 BMI727 : It will if it is diverting resources from other projects. I don't think that a lot of A350 customers will be particularly happy with Airbus potential
101 tdscanuck : Totally practical in a business/first cabin where you're only 6 abreast in a widebody with large outboard pivot bins, which is exactly what the photo
102 ferpe : Quoting stitch (reply 95): "The A350-800HGW will certainly have the legs on the 787-8, but if it proves to be popular in that specification, Boeing ca
103 Post contains links LAXDESI : Different operators have different seat pitch and seat distribution between classes, and that makes it nearly impossible to compare. I prefer to take
104 Stitch : That pretty much is the reason - Airbus needed a plane that not only replaced the A330 (to fight the 787), but also the A340 because the latter was n
105 Post contains links keesje : Tom, I think it's no so absolute as you suggest, I guess. - DL http://www.airliners.net/photo/Delta...Lines/Boeing-777-232-LR/1334937/M/ - CO http://
106 ferpe : 1. But the difference is 36% and the weight differences are only 10-20%. 2. A seems to prefer the route "do the mid model and use wing, MLG, tail etc
107 SchorschNG : Airbus cannot push the -1000 so hard as the engine is already stretched. You can always trade wing area for thrust to get field performance right, wi
108 Stitch : I've long been under impression the span & wing area differences between the original 787-8 and 787-9 wing were the length of those scythe-like w
109 flyglobal : I see it more like this: The 787-8 must go to market first. One of the good performing things are especially the wings. No need for more as originall
110 tdscanuck : I'm not really following you on this, Keesje. Just because it may be practical to not have the center bins in business/first doesn't mean it's imprac
111 XT6Wagon : Less wingspan for same performance is a good thing, I'm sure that Boeing was under pressure to use the 788 wingspan on the 789 for airlines with gate
112 ferpe : Well it would be understandable if the 36% difference was for the -1000 (where the "common" Trent XWB is getting pressed on power and you trade more
113 packsonflight : What does your crystal ball say about geometry limitation of the 777-300? I thought that it was limited by unstick speed as it is right now and any f
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airbus A350 XWB Question posted Mon Oct 30 2006 15:04:07 by Eaglewarrior
Airbus Completes A350 XWB Milestone 5 Review posted Fri Jan 2 2009 13:53:49 by Keesje
Airbus On Track To Freeze A350 XWB Lines posted Wed Jun 4 2008 08:50:16 by Aviationbuff
10-abreast A350 XWB -Airbus Proposal posted Mon May 19 2008 05:29:01 by Aviationbuff
Hawaiian Air Delay A350-XWB Purchase posted Fri Jan 18 2008 13:24:51 by PanAm_DC10
Airbus Rolls Out A350 XWB Design Revisions posted Tue Sep 25 2007 15:47:45 by Carls
Airbus Lobbies GE To Offer GEnx For A350 XWB posted Fri Apr 20 2007 12:12:09 by Keesje
Will Airbus's "XWB-A350" Be Delivered On Time? posted Fri Dec 8 2006 23:20:39 by OU812
Walsh: BA To Talk To Airbus About A350 XWB posted Mon Dec 4 2006 13:29:52 by Leelaw
FT:Airbus A350 Delay Could Affect US Airways posted Fri Oct 27 2006 12:53:32 by UALMMFlyer