Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
QR Switch A350 Order To -900, -800 To Be Dropped?  
User currently offlineBthebest From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2008, 507 posts, RR: 0
Posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2091 times:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ps-a350-800-for-larger-900-378997/

After the Afriqiyah Airways order/switch a couple of days ago there is a serious possibility the A350-800 could be heading the same way as the 787-3.

US and Aeroflot now hold the largest orders with 18 a piece.

63 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2103 times:

Its hard to see the use of the A358 over the A359.

User currently offlinescouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

I think that it's likely to end up like the A388F which never officially cancelled just "delayed indefinitely" but this will simplify the build process for A now as the A358 will gradually fade and more resources can go on the A359.

I'd imagine that the possibility of some sort of A330neo might be stronger eventually though as without the A358 there's a big gap between the A321 and A359


User currently offlinePM From Germany, joined Feb 2005, 6920 posts, RR: 63
Reply 3, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2105 times:

Fascinating. The exit of the -800 seems only a matter of time. No problem. The -900 is a winner and I'm among those who believe that the -1000 is gaining traction.

User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2103 times:

Quoting scouseflyer (Reply 2):

I'd imagine that the possibility of some sort of A330neo might be stronger eventually though as without the A358 there's a big gap between the A321 and A359

Exactly my thinking too, a A330neo gets more realistic with any defection from the 800 backlog. The A358 is the least optimized model of that family, this is the downside of trying to cover your competitors 2 families with one family.


User currently offlineqf002 From Australia, joined Jul 2011, 2987 posts, RR: 2
Reply 5, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

Not a surprise.

I'd put money on Airbus canning the A358. It's happened before in this size bracket with the 777-100, and A330-100.

[Edited 2012-11-14 07:48:54]

User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8380 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2097 times:

Quoting sweair (Reply 4):
Exactly my thinking too, a A330neo gets more realistic with any defection from the 800 backlog.

I was going to agree with this but I often forget that NEO stands for "New Engine Option".
As has been mentioned before, I don't see any engine manufacturer signing up for this project.
What I do see is Airbus embarking on a improvement project for the A330 that does not require a new engine.


User currently online817Dreamliiner From Montserrat, joined Jul 2008, 2390 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

Quoting qf002 (Reply 5):
I'd put money on Airbus canning the A358.

Well I wouldnt say so yet, they still have a good amount on the books, 92 as stated by the FG article. If we see more conversions to the -900/-1000 then I guess it will be considered dead then...



Reality be Rent. Synapse, break! Vanishment, This World!
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2100 times:

Quoting airbazar (Reply 6):

They could always go for the GEnx if it could be uprated in thrust. That is an engine in service and has quite good SFC compared to the current A330 engine. A 748 sort of update of the A330? Could be doable if the A358 gets cut


User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1580 posts, RR: 3
Reply 9, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

Quoting scouseflyer (Reply 2):
I'd imagine that the possibility of some sort of A330neo might be stronger eventually though as without the A358 there's a big gap between the A321 and A359

Yup, A330NEO and throw a A350-1100 into the mix when Boeing decide to launch the 777-9.



BV
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2108 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 9):

Yeah I wonder if its better to grow the A350 upwards than it was to shrink it, probably better to do a 777-9X sized frame while they are at it. The engines could be of the same thrust class that the 777-X has on its list.

The A330neo could cover the lower market. GEnx2b engines should be about 13% more efficient than the CF6.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31003 posts, RR: 86
Reply 11, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2109 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

There is not going to be an A330neo.

Airbus will follow Boeing's game plan with the 767 and sell it mostly as a freighter and military tanker/transport with top-up passenger frame orders to existing customers or to new customers who can't wait for or afford a 787-8.

The saving grace for the A350-800 is that all Airbus needs to do is tweak the vertical stabilizer to account for the smaller moment arm of the shortened fuselage. So Airbus effectively has all the engineering work done already and therefore they do not need to cancel it or defer it for resources to commit to the A350-1000.

So I expect Airbus to continue to offer it, even if all the current customers convert orders to the A350-900.


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1610 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2104 times:

With QR dropping the A358, it wouldn't surprise me to see a 787-9 order, they still have 30 options and even appear to be interested in the 787-10X.

Quoting Bthebest (Thread starter):
US and Aeroflot now hold the largest orders with 18 a piece.

I really wonder why SU still hangs on to the A358. They also have 789s on order, the A359 seems far more logical for SU than the -800.

US and HA probably don't want to switch to the -900, it's too big. If Airbus cancels the A358 I expect US and HA to be very tempted to switch to 787s.

Quoting PM (Reply 3):
The -900 is a winner and I'm among those who believe that the -1000 is gaining traction.

  



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,AT4/7,ATP,CRK,E90,F50/7
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5762 posts, RR: 47
Reply 13, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2105 times:

These guys at Strategic Aero have been predicting the demise of the A350-800. Looks like they're closer to being right.

http://www.strategicaeroresearch.com/2012/06/05/airbusa350xwb/



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8380 posts, RR: 10
Reply 14, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2105 times:

Quoting frigatebird (Reply 12):
US and HA probably don't want to switch to the -900, it's too big. If Airbus cancels the A358 I expect US and HA to be very tempted to switch to 787s.

Aren't both US and HA's orders being financed by Airbus? I'd say that if Airbus wants to can the A358 their orders are as good as gone.


User currently offlineWarpSpeed From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 591 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2104 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
they do not need to cancel it or defer it for resources to commit to the A350-1000.

However, might Airbus defer the -800 so they can bring forward the EIS of the A350-1000?



DaHjaj jaj QaQ Daghajjaj !!!!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11691 posts, RR: 33
Reply 16, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 2106 times:

I agree with Stitch.

There are still about 90 orders left for the -800. Looking at the small amount of work Airbus has to accomplish to certificate the -800, I don't see it getting canceled.

And there are more rumours:

Quote:
Source tells me Qatar Airways is intending to take more #Airbus A350-1000s as well as -900s, as part of -800 order conversion.
http://twitter.com/FlightDKM/status/268785502805692417



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2104 times:

I think there is more value in growing that frame than shrinking it, it is too big to be a good A332 replacement. 900/1000 and a 1100 model would sell better IMO. Do a 748ish neo of the A330 on the lower end.

User currently offlineHmelawyer From United States of America, joined May 2011, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2098 times:

I don't see the A330NEO being competitive enough to warrant the investment. With the more modest improvements upcoming, I agree with earlier posters that the 330 should still be able to get some occasional orders like the 767 has and it should be allowed to gracefully wind down. If the 350-800 goes away, which I am starting to think as a possibility has inched across the 50% likelihood line, Airbus should really start thinking about launching an A360 (mid-size, mid-range frame) program in the middle of this decade for approx. EIS 2022. This would eliminate the current gap in the product line, and if done correctly not be a direct compete against the 787. The frame should be optimized around 5000 nm, 190-240 passengers, with an ER version to later follow that could stretch out to 7000 nm.

This would primarily go after the replacement market for 762, 763, 332, and even longer 757 routes. While those markets appear to be pinched based on recent ordering (and retirement) patterns favoring the larger 333 and 787 frames, that is in large part due to the fact that the larger frames can now give relatively equivalent trip costs with more revenue capacity. However, applying new technologies without the constraints of allowing for long range operations (as the 787 and 350 provide) the new A360 frame should be able to lower trip costs and, therefore, CASM, to a point where if the route does not support the need for larger capacity the better financial option is to go with the smaller/more optimized frame. The new plane is likely to meet the needs of any customers that would still be on the order books for a 358 and a delay of a couple of years may not hurt Airbus that much because customers may not have any other options (assuming by that point 787 backlog will have reached a point of being roughly similar to 360 EIS)

By mid-late decade Airbus should have plenty of resources to launch a new program. The 350 and 320 NEO will be in or moving to production status, narrowbody replacement has been pushed out, and all other parts of the product catalog will be fully competitive and not needing anymore attention than regular updates. Boeing will have its plate full with 777X to respond to 350, and finishing up 737MAX, so probably could not immediately respond (not to mention the fact that given the size of the 787, Boeing will probably have to respond to this segment from below with the 737 replacement which is pushed due to the MAX).

These are just my musings, but would love to hear viewpoints if I am not seeing this clearly. Better for Airbus to steal a whole market segment than trying to force a frame that nearly no one seems to want.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31003 posts, RR: 86
Reply 19, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2099 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Hmelawyer (Reply 18):
These are just my musings, but would love to hear viewpoints if I am not seeing this clearly.

Airlines have clearly decided that they're willing to accept more capability than they need if the trade-offs are acceptable.

Boeing launched the 7E7 sized around the 767 and A330 because they didn't want to impact the 777. In negotiations with airlines, they wanted larger planes with greater ranges because doing so didn't significantly increase trip costs while decreasing CASM.

We've also seen Airbus push the performance of the A330 family to keep it competitive with the greater performance of the 787 and Airbus has also had to improve the A350-1000's performance to close the gap to the 777-300ER even though the A350 offers much better operating economics.

So I just don't see much of a market for a widebody twin sized around the A300-600 / 767-300ER. The 787 and A350 will offer more capacity and capability and even if their trip costs are lower, so will the CASM and I believe that too few airlines could take advantage of it to make it worth the effort.


User currently offlineHmelawyer From United States of America, joined May 2011, 65 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2101 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 19):
Airlines have clearly decided that they're willing to accept more capability than they need if the trade-offs are acceptable.

Boeing launched the 7E7 sized around the 767 and A330 because they didn't want to impact the 777. In negotiations with airlines, they wanted larger planes with greater ranges because doing so didn't significantly increase trip costs while decreasing CASM.

I totally agree. However, my thought is that technological changes between the launch of 7E7 and when the new frame would launch (approx. 15 years) have made it such that a properly optimized plane could significantly reduce the trip costs such that the 787 would have a higher CASM than the new plane, to an extent that the trade-offs were so acceptable. Is the issue that the technology isn't there for that to happen? I totally understand why your point has been correct in recent times, but its seems that there should be a shift at some point that allows airlines to right size again at a financial advantage.


User currently offlinesweair From Sweden, joined Nov 2011, 1824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 8 hours ago) and read 2100 times:

If no A358 is sold the gap between A321 and A359 is huge! Certainly there is room for an optimized frame in that space, if not Airbus would give up a lot of market for Boeing to grab.

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31003 posts, RR: 86
Reply 22, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 2100 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting sweair (Reply 21):
If no A358 is sold the gap between A321 and A359 is huge! Certainly there is room for an optimized frame in that space, if not Airbus would give up a lot of market for Boeing to grab.

Boeing's doing just fine with a large gap between the 737-900ER and 787-8 while producing a dozen to a score of 767's a year.

Airbus have done very well with the A330-200 over the life of the program and freighter and military sales will support a production rate of a couple a month for some time, I imagine. So they should do fine, as well.

[Edited 2012-11-14 13:42:19]

User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4739 posts, RR: 39
Reply 23, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 2104 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PM (Reply 3):
Fascinating. The exit of the -800 seems only a matter of time. No problem. The -900 is a winner and I'm among those who believe that the -1000 is gaining traction.

Regarding the -1000 I am in that "camp" too!  . I am not sure they will cancel the -800. Especially in the light of what Stitch is saying:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 11):
The saving grace for the A350-800 is that all Airbus needs to do is tweak the vertical stabilizer to account for the smaller moment arm of the shortened fuselage. So Airbus effectively has all the engineering work done already and therefore they do not need to cancel it or defer it for resources to commit to the A350-1000.

This puts the -800 development in another daylight. So it seems the -800 is hardly a big development and could be easily derived from the -900 version.  .

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 16):
And there are more rumours:

Quote:
Source tells me Qatar Airways is intending to take more #Airbus A350-1000s as well as -900s, as part of -800 order conversion.
http://twitter.com/FlightDKM/status/...92417

More and more airlines are starting to show their interest in the-1000 version of the A350-XWB. As predicted, now the market becomes more clear, and the delivery time starts to become overseeable, it is gaining more and more traction from blue chip airlines. And just recently here on A-net many were still calling the plane a dog. Things can change over time.........  


User currently offlineCM From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (1 year 10 months 1 week 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 2099 times:

In one sense, pressure on the A350-800 is reduced when people like Al Bakar vacate their interest in the model. I am sure Airbus feels the order struggles of the A358 keenly, but I actually see this a positive for the A350 program and future of the A350-800. Here's why:

Airbus' original plan was to introduce the three models (A359, A358, and A351) in rapid succession, each about 1 year after the preceding model. This aggressive scheduling meant there was not time in the development plan to let the A358 design loads benefit from flight loads survey on the A359, as A358 parts would be fully sized and possibly even entering production before Airbus would have A359 flight loads survey data available. Airbus acknowledged the A358 would be developed as a "simple shrink" of the A359, and has been beat up pretty soundly for that original program strategy.

Since the original plan was laid out in 2007, a few important things have happened to the A350 program:

1. The A351 and A358 have swapped order.
2. The schedule for successor models to the A359 has been made less aggressive
3. The majority of the A358 order book has evaporated

I am convinced the A358 will be built, but I expect to see it completely redefined first. I believe Airbus will revise the program schedule one more time in order to permit the A358 to be developed as a fully optimized minor model of the A350 family.

The alternatives to this (as has been noted in posts above) is to compete in the market space between the A321 and the A359 with...

1. An incrementally improved A330 (will slowly become like the 767 has been versus the A330 over the next 6-7 years)
2. A non-optimized A358 (already tried and not successful to-date)
3. A re-engined A330neo (the finished product would still fall short of the 787 and likely more costly than optimizing the A358)

Since Airbus really needs to look at how they will compete in this space for the next 30 years, alternatives to a fully optimized A358 all seem like poor choices to me. I expect to eventually see a refined A358 offered with an EIS in the 2019 timeframe.


25 ferpe : Didider Evrard has in the last month said Airbus would like the -1000 and -800 to swap order. Now what technique can Airbus use to keep those happy w
26 lightsaber : First: I'm a HUGE fan of the A359 and A350-1000, so read my comments below understanding that. Agreed. There will be little to know resale value of th
27 ferpe : I think CMs reasoning is very interesting, if you can gain the benefit of coming after both the -900 (flight loads) and the -1000 (engine improvement
28 BoeingVista : I do not really agree with either of these points, when you factor in purchase cost the A330neo will be using an engine 8 years younger that the 787
29 ferpe : This is your problem, you can't have an engine weight like a Trent 700 (4800kg) and a TSFC like a T1000-TEN (-10%) for nothing. The latter weighs som
30 RickNRoll : The A330 wing has been built to be strong enough to carry four engines.
31 BoeingVista : Yet again I don't agree. Modern materials are lighter and if RR moved from a titanium fan to a composite fan they would save about 500kg per engine/n
32 Post contains links RubberJungle : More on the conversion and the possibility of -1000s: http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...pped-to-include-more-1000s-379015/
33 JerseyFlyer : As QR were to take the first A358 deliveries, there is likely to be a deferral of EIS, even if only by default. I am sure Airbus would prefer to devot
34 sweair : What is wrong with the 748 engine, it is a bleed version of the GEnx? 13% more efficient than the CF6 it replaced? Too heavy? This engine will get a P
35 ferpe : Nope, and the T1000 is designed with the Ti fan, this is something you don't change easily. CFRP is already available in the 70klbf segment with the
36 ferpe : The GEnx-2B is the most suitable replacement for the T700/CF6-80E but it is still some 7 to 12 inches larger then these engines and 0.8t heavier, so
37 StickShaker : Can someone enlighten us as to how much more complex the engineering challenges would be to fully optimise the A358 as opposed to just modifying the
38 Bthebest : On a slight tangent - what's the ICAO designator for the A350-1000 going to be? A35X? A351?
39 sweair : There was an article about the 748 linked the other day and it said the 748 is getting more thrust for hot and high performance, so that engine has s
40 BoeingVista : I feel that you are missing the point... GE won't gain from a carbon fan as they already have it but the T700 can. GE have used the weight somewhere
41 r2rho : From a purely sales point of view, it would make sense to swap EIS of both models. But there is (very) high engineering risk in doing that, because t
42 Post contains images sweair : My old A322 idea seems the obvious answer here, invest some in the A321 frame, do a real 757 replacement frame of the A321. New wings, engines and UC
43 BoeingVista : Then complete a 6 month test campaign write up the certification documentation... Not small jobs
44 parapente : Reply 2. there's a big gap between the A321 and A359 Yes and much bigger than the gap between the 739MAX and the 788. And that is the critical differe
45 rheinwaldner : IMO CM is right and StickShaker asked the right question. I would not be suprised, if Airbus one day, less than 10 years ahead, would launch a A350 v
46 Post contains images airbazar : So, an A350 LITE? Where have I heard that name before? I'm not disagreeing though.
47 mffoda : That additional time frame and certification documentation would pail in comparison to doing a A330 neo. Airbus is already on record as saying that d
48 art : Airbus tried to avoid a head on contest with either 787 or 777, didn't they? They pitched their design between the 2 different aircraft. PIP's to bri
49 BoeingVista : I think that the weight problem could be more easily solved with an engine from RR, and solving the weight issue solves a lot of wing strengthening i
50 Stitch : No A350-800 customer is in a hurry to get their frame. Airbus pushed the EIS back from 2014 to 2016 not because of design issues, but because no A350
51 astuteman : I'm in complete agreement with this. The A350-800 could then be re-defined as you described, being much more optimised around lower weights and thrus
52 Post contains images ferpe : You forget that the original A350 had a CFRP wing in those lovely days of 2005 when CFRP was the new mantra and "at least 20% lighter" then anything
53 Post contains images CM : This is the first reason there won't be a A330neo... PIPs to the current A330 can get you a good chunk of what you would gain from a new engine. The
54 Post contains links and images ferpe : Especially down, there are some design decisions in the -900 that will make life difficult for any shorter variant, one of the major ones is how Airb
55 davs5032 : Good points, both of you. I didn't know that the -800 development work was that minimal, so based on that alone, even if only a few customers' orders
56 CM : As we've discussed before, the 787 design is remarkably compact, when you consider what it gets inside. Included in what's inside the 787 is an aft E
57 lightsaber : It would be a very nice plane technically, but with too small of a market. Would you want your retirement savings invested into such a plane leased t
58 ADent : You can push the A350-800 back all you want, but you can't push the A350-1000 forward much because of the engineering data needed from -900 tests.
59 JerseyFlyer : If US merges with AA they will actively WANT to upguage to A359 / 10.
60 JerseyFlyer : Very interesting. Has Boeing invented something new here in order to pack the LD3s closer together than current aircraft, 333, 777 etc Or has Airbus
61 JerseyFlyer : There is scope for a clever but simple "parts bin" approach. 4 or 5 fuselage lengths, from A306 equivalent to maybe above A3510, and two "core" wing
62 rheinwaldner : Granted. Therefore I said "about the same". But I see the point especially about the size-aspect. In fact the 77X to be enlarged is mandatory, to min
63 astuteman : That's sort of where I was going. But saw the 2 pairs also having distinct engines and landing gear Just idle speculation Rgds
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...
BI To Switch Order From 77L To 77W posted Tue Oct 19 2010 17:50:25 by KFlyer
United Close To 787 Or A350 Order posted Thu Nov 19 2009 19:44:08 by Zone1
Finnair To Reconsider A350 Order posted Thu Oct 5 2006 21:35:06 by Findigenous
Finnair, No Need To Review A350 Order posted Mon Jun 5 2006 17:24:35 by WINGS
CRJ700/900 To Be Offered As Bizjets posted Fri May 26 2006 09:59:15 by Flying-Tiger
Biman In Liquidity Crisis: FRA & ORY To Be Dropped posted Sun Oct 23 2005 21:42:25 by Planemannyc
Qatar Has Yet To Decide On 787/A350 Order posted Thu Jun 9 2005 21:47:44 by CXoneWorld
Leahy Has To Adjust Paris A350 Order Expectations. posted Thu Jun 2 2005 14:53:05 by Keesje
A350: Authorization To Offer To Be Approved In 2004 posted Wed Nov 10 2004 12:50:49 by Flying-Tiger
Is EC To LGA And DCA Be Possible W/ A Stop In YHZ? posted Fri Sep 28 2012 12:38:08 by TWA85