Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
A350XWB Countdown To The First Flight   
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 96904 times:

Eagerly awaited: "The company expects to achieve first flight of its A350 jet in the coming three months, Airbus CEO Fabrice Bregier said in the sidelines of a groundbreaking ceremony for a $600 million (393.52 million pounds) Airbus factory in Mobile.

http://www.globalpost.com

Between May and July?

324 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineovercast From United Kingdom, joined May 2005, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 96888 times:

I make it April, May or June. I have a feeling that progress is better than expected, so am hopeful of handover to the Flight Test this month and FF next month.

Just my 1 cent/penny etc


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1605 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 96718 times:

Earlier they said "early summer", so I expect their internal goal will probably be between the last week of June and the first week of July. And I think that has been the case for a while now (and that might also be the reason why they haven't said anything like "Q2 2013" or "Q3 2013". If it slips from the last week of June to the first week of July Airbus would still be be bang on target, but some would say a delay of another quarter...   )


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 offline3rdGen From Bahrain, joined Jul 2011, 236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 96489 times:

When will aircraft manufacturers learn to stop giving out dates or time frames, when was the last time they gave us a date for anything which was actually met?

User currently onlinemigair54 From Spain, joined Jun 2007, 1721 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 94416 times:

Quoting 3rdGen (Reply 3):
When will aircraft manufacturers learn to stop giving out dates or time frames, when was the last time they gave us a date for anything which was actually met?

And we can apply that for Airports... look at Berlin, Doha and soon Istambul...  


I was not even aware that the A350 could fly this year...


User currently offlinebaldwin471 From UK - England, joined Mar 2012, 296 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 94221 times:

Can't wait to see her take to the sky. Haven't been this excited for a first flight since the 777.

User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3203 posts, RR: 9
Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 91233 times:

And Le Bourget is when exactly? The target must surely be to ensure it's ready for a flight display there so enough time for testing before.


come visit the south pacific
User currently onlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 721 posts, RR: 6
Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 91210 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 6):
And Le Bourget is when exactly? The target must surely be to ensure it's ready for a flight display there so enough time for testing before.

17 - 23 June, so in about 2.5 months



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8016 posts, RR: 5
Reply 8, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 90345 times:

Forget about first flight--how about the first taxi tests?

User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 9, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 90106 times:

Quoting overcast (Reply 1):

I make it April, May or June. I have a feeling that progress is better than expected, so am hopeful of handover to the Flight Test this month and FF next month.

Yes, that is the the next three months, but I don't think that it will be flying yet.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinewindowflyer From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 89712 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 9):
Yes, that is the the next three months

LOL. I was about to make the same smart@ss comment.

Cant wait to see this baby fly. Another model to get under my belt.



A-300,319,320,321,330,340,380. B-727,737,747,757,767,777,787. L-1011,DC8,DC9,MD80,CRJ,Dash-8,YS-11,HS-748,Concorde
User currently offlinebristolflyer From United Kingdom, joined May 2004, 2296 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 15 hours ago) and read 88894 times:

Quoting flymd1976 (Reply 10):
That plane's first test flight was a number of years ago. It's called a 787...wheres the innovation?

That's strange, I thought I heard that the 787 was doing test flights this week?

  



Fortune favours the brave
User currently offlineMauriceB From Netherlands, joined Aug 2004, 2490 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 86158 times:

Quoting bristolflyer (Reply 11):

Quoting flymd1976 (Reply 10):
That plane's first test flight was a number of years ago. It's called a 787...wheres the innovation?

That's strange, I thought I heard that the 787 was doing test flights this week?

  

hahaha, oke that just made my day! Thanks!

But really, when can we expect to see the A350 fully completed with the Airbus livery?


User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3947 posts, RR: 4
Reply 13, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 85935 times:

Quoting MauriceB (Reply 12):
But really, when can we expect to see the A350 fully completed with the Airbus livery?

At the reveal ceremony, no guarantees of before (Airbus managed to keep the corporate livery refresh a secret right up until the reveal ceremony).


User currently offlinesabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 46
Reply 14, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 85025 times:

If they hurry up in TLS, they can get the XWB in the air before the 787 gets its type certificate back!
Now that would be ironic, wouldn't it?  


User currently offlineAviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 619 posts, RR: 8
Reply 15, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 84840 times:

Indeed they can spoil 787's return to flight with skilled PR such as roll out, taxy tests ... even before the A350 first flight

User currently offlineSVJ77W From United Arab Emirates, joined Apr 2013, 45 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 84700 times:

Oh WOW, I just cannot wait. When I was told about the Mayan prophecy of 21st December, 2012, My only thought was oh God, We wont get to see the A350 XWB flying. Glad to hear this is going to be real soon.

Is there any pictures of her out there with the engines on?


User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 84458 times:

Quoting sabenapilot (Reply 14):

If they hurry up in TLS, they can get the XWB in the air before the 787 gets its type certificate back!
Now that would be ironic, wouldn't it?  

It hasn't lost it's type certificate. The FAA has just said that the battery problem must be repaired, but they don't say how this must be done.


User currently offlinefrigatebird From Netherlands, joined Jun 2008, 1605 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 84397 times:

Quoting sabenapilot (Reply 14):
If they hurry up in TLS, they can get the XWB in the air before the 787 gets its type certificate back!

Yeah, I'm sure the Airbus engineers will work that little bit harder with such knowledge in mind  

The A350XWB is already more than a year behind schedule, I'm sure everyone involved in the program are working as hard as they can, even if they see a possibility to win one day they'll give it their best. And the A350 program is strong as it is without having to point out to its competitors challenges.



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 offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 20 hours ago) and read 80621 times:

Is she already beautiful enough?

User currently offlineDTWPurserBoy From United States of America, joined Feb 2010, 1627 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (1 year 5 months 1 week 4 hours ago) and read 79831 times:

I am holding opinion until I see the completed aircraft. I still think the cockpit/nose section looks funny but that may change with paint and lighting. Wishing her well on her maiden flight.


Qualified on Concorde/B707/B720/B727/B737/B747/B757/B767/B777/DC-8/DC-9/DC-10/A319/A320/A330/MD-88-90
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 78877 times:

The start-topic "A350XWB Countdown To The First Flight In Next Time" was changed into "A350XWB Countdown To The First Flight".

Now would space for one spaces between A350 and XWB.
What do you think?
Like this: "A350 XWB Countdown To The First Flight"

Or is
A350XWB a good encryption?
DREAMLI a good decryption?


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 78756 times:

Quoting Bogi (Thread starter):
in the coming three months,

I think what he actually meant to say was "within 3 months" or "in about 3 months". I don't believe FF is planned for April. Or May.


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 78592 times:

Logically:
Quoting art (Reply 22):
I think what he actually meant to say was "within 3 months" or "in about 3 months". I don't believe FF is planned for April. Or May.


User currently offlinercair1 From United States of America, joined Oct 2009, 1320 posts, RR: 52
Reply 24, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 78240 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CUSTOMER SERVICE & SUPPORT

Exciting to see a new type getting ready to soar. I wonder if the wing flex will be as dramatic as the 787. I would assume so - but I have not heard the discussion - though the renderings certainly seem to show it. Have we seen word of static tests? All I can find is that it is "ready" - and "moved to the static test facility".

Quoting sabenapilot (Reply 14):
before the 787 gets its type certificate back!
Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 15):
Indeed they can spoil 787's return to flight with skilled PR such as roll out, taxy tests ... even before the A350 first flight

Really guys - can't we just enjoy a new a/c without being .....



rcair1
User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4736 posts, RR: 39
Reply 25, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 79588 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting rcair1 (Reply 24):
I wonder if the wing flex will be as dramatic as the 787. I would assume so - but I have not heard the discussion - though the renderings certainly seem to show it.

Don't forget that the A380 also has a lot of wing flex as well.  .


User currently offlineart From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3382 posts, RR: 1
Reply 26, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 79212 times:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 25):

+  


User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7149 posts, RR: 57
Reply 27, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 80956 times:

Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 15):
Indeed they can spoil 787's return to flight with skilled PR such as roll out, taxy tests ... even before the A350 first flight

The last time the marketing department decided on the roll-out date Home Depot had a run on Rivets. Let engineering decide the first fight.

Me thinks the 787 will have its type certificate long before this puppy flies!



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineAsturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 2153 posts, RR: 16
Reply 28, posted (1 year 5 months 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 80622 times:

Quoting migair54 (Reply 4):
I was not even aware that the A350 could fly this year...

Me neither! Wow, I'm looking forward  



Tonight we fly
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 29, posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 79234 times:

Rolls Royce Trent XWB Engine Installation on First Airbus A350 XWB (26 March 2013 Press Release). The watching was already exciting: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wiscr7MeAxw

User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 30, posted (1 year 5 months 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 78313 times:

That's good to smile: SpeaksWiki Article Airbus A350 XWB http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1cS4GKm9v8

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12541 posts, RR: 25
Reply 31, posted (1 year 5 months 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 76809 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 27):
Me thinks the 787 will have its type certificate long before this puppy flies!

Certainly true, because the 787 already has its type certificate. However there is an Airworthiness Directive that is keeping it grounded till the FAA deems it is airworthy again.

In any case, best of luck to the A350XWB team - can't wait to see it fly!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4397 posts, RR: 2
Reply 32, posted (1 year 5 months 2 days ago) and read 75846 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 31):
In any case, best of luck to the A350XWB team - can't wait to see it fly!

Can't agree more! And I wish the A350 a smooth test program.


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 33, posted (1 year 5 months 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 75238 times:


cool glasses?


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 34, posted (1 year 4 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 74079 times:

Is on Friday 3rd May, Monday 13rd May or on Thursday 23rd May roll-out ceremony of the A350?

[Edited 2013-04-20 06:49:14]

User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3203 posts, RR: 9
Reply 35, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 72454 times:

Any word on a potential first flight date? Could there be a flight display at Le Bourget?


come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 36, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 71888 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 35):
Could there be a flight display at Le Bourget?

If first flight does occur before the show, the flight test program will be in its absolute infancy, I think that the chances of any flying at Le Bourget are close to 0%.



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 37, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 70315 times:

Over one month there is no new informations or photos. This is amazing.

User currently offlinerj777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1842 posts, RR: 2
Reply 38, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 69443 times:

So is this the A358 or A359?

User currently onlinestarbucks From Netherlands, joined Feb 2013, 721 posts, RR: 6
Reply 39, posted (1 year 4 months 3 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 69167 times:

A359

*filler, but I don't know how much characters are minimum*



A350 logbook: http://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/pub?key=0AlVgPnmHLOovdFdzbVlyQzhYNDhCb1VFN1RkYXkwV3c&output=html
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 40, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 67815 times:

Starts today the new competition-program B777X?

Boeings annual stockholders meeting is April 29 in Chicago.


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 41, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 66764 times:

Published on April 29, 2013.

Hexcel: The A350 XWB makes its first flight later this year.   

Hexcel To Attend SAMPE 2013


User currently offlinemotorhussy From New Zealand, joined Mar 2000, 3203 posts, RR: 9
Reply 42, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 66086 times:

Quoting Speedbird128 (Reply 36):
I think that the chances of any flying at Le Bourget are close to 0%.

So static?



come visit the south pacific
User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3584 posts, RR: 3
Reply 43, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 65582 times:

Whats the chance of the 1st flight being during Le Bourget with a live screening on the Airbus stand ?

User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12541 posts, RR: 25
Reply 44, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 65314 times:

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 43):
Whats the chance of the 1st flight being during Le Bourget with a live screening on the Airbus stand ?

I think the ones that would be buying it can find their way to Toulouse, no?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 45, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 64794 times:

You think, MSN001 will painted this or next week, then be immediately handed on to the Airbus Flight Test team, for the first time no roll-out event and after the first flight the first official presentation in Le Bourget on the static display?

User currently offlineBongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3584 posts, RR: 3
Reply 46, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 64646 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 44):
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 43):
Whats the chance of the 1st flight being during Le Bourget with a live screening on the Airbus stand ?

I think the ones that would be buying it can find their way to Toulouse, no?

Of course the buyers can find their way to Toulouse, working on that basis though, why stage Le Bourget or Farnborough as serious potential buyers will always be accomodated at the manufacturers premises.

The answer is its good publicity to advertise your success to the widest audience possible. Thats why Airbus stage those headline daily press conferences at the airshows. The publicity value would be enhanced by John Leahy announcing more A350XWB orders with the backdrop showing the live 1st takeoff.


User currently offlineSpeedbird128 From Pitcairn Islands, joined Oct 2003, 1648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 47, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 64570 times:

Quoting motorhussy (Reply 42):
So static?

I still doubt that Airbus can afford for it to stand around doing nothing when they are desperate to keep any delays down to an absolute minimum...

I'd really love to see it there, but personally - I doubt it.



A306, A313, A319, A320, A321, A332, A343, A345, A346 A388, AC90, B06, B722, B732, B733, B735, B738, B744, B762, B772, B7
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 48, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 64468 times:

The Bourget organisers confirmed that there won't be an A350 static nor flying display. Of course, nothing would prevent Airbus for doing a low pass fly by if the plane is ready but IMO they could use their valuable time for the test program instead.

[Edited 2013-04-30 03:48:27]


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 49, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 64087 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 48):
The Bourget organisers confirmed that there won't be an A350 static nor flying display.

The Airbus A350XWB is not planned to the Paris Air Show, with managing director Gilles Fournier predicting the first flight before the show, which kicks off on June 17.


Boeing 787 to Fly at Paris Air Show as Airbus A350 Debut in Flux


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 50, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 63949 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 49):
The Airbus A350XWB is not planned to the Paris Air Show

That's what I said? No flying nor static display.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineEagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1833 posts, RR: 2
Reply 51, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 63820 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Bogi (Reply 49):
The Airbus A350XWB is not planned to the Paris Air Show, with managing director Gilles Fournier predicting the first flight before the show, which kicks off on June 17.
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 48):
he Bourget organisers confirmed that there won't be an A350 static nor flying display. Of course, nothing would prevent Airbus for doing a low pass fly by if the plane is ready but IMO they could use their valuable time for the test program instead
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 46):
The answer is its good publicity to advertise your success to the widest audience possible.

I completely understand Airbus not committing to any display at Le Bourget..........1st flight is still not confirmed itself...........but I would lay good money on the airshow finding a 10 minutes gap if Airbus suddenly ask if they can do an A350 flyover on 1 of the days.


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12541 posts, RR: 25
Reply 52, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 63598 times:

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 46):
Of course the buyers can find their way to Toulouse, working on that basis though, why stage Le Bourget or Farnborough as serious potential buyers will always be accomodated at the manufacturers premises.

Why close down the air show just because the A350 program can't afford the time to park a frame there so early in the program? If one wants to see the A350 and one is an important buyer, one will be asked to come to Toulouse, at least for this year.

Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 46):
The answer is its good publicity to advertise your success to the widest audience possible.

It won't be good publicity to delay the A350, will it?

Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 51):
I completely understand Airbus not committing to any display at Le Bourget..........1st flight is still not confirmed itself...........but I would lay good money on the airshow finding a 10 minutes gap if Airbus suddenly ask if they can do an A350 flyover on 1 of the days.

I hope that happens!

If I were an A350 test pilot, perhaps I'd just have to wander off course a bit and buzz the airshow!

Might cost me my job, but it'd be a good way to remember Tex Johnston! 



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 53, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 63482 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 52):
Might cost me my job, but it'd be a good way to remember Tex Johnston! 

Reminds me of the Cathay 777 low pass flyby at Everett.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 54, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 62854 times:

With google translated from German into English: "The new twin-engine long-haul Airbus A350 is expected to complete its first flight in June or July. This was announced by the China Speaker of european aircraft manufacturer Airbus in Beijing."

http://german.china.org.cn/china/2013-05/01/content_28702739.htm


User currently offlinecornutt From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 338 posts, RR: 1
Reply 55, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 16 hours ago) and read 62325 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 52):
Might cost me my job, but it'd be a good way to remember Tex Johnston!

Only if he barrel-rolls it.  


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 56, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 61946 times:

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...-factor-now-real-unreal-and-untidy
Slightly confused?

Boeing sees the A350 as competing with 787s.
Airbus sees the A350 as competing with 777s.

Which of the two statements is more true?


User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 57, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 61753 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 56):
Boeing sees the A350 as competing with 787s.
Airbus sees the A350 as competing with 777s.

Which of the two statements is more true?

The second.



Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlineAsiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 58, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 61681 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 56):
Which of the two statements is more true?


Both.... Depends on what airline it is.



SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 59, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 11 hours ago) and read 61689 times:

There is no 1-to-1 competition in this segment, many airlines are ordering both aircraft types.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinescouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3390 posts, RR: 9
Reply 60, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 61651 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 56):
Boeing sees the A350 as competing with 787s.
Airbus sees the A350 as competing with 777s.

Which of the two statements is more true?

I see it something like this

788
A332
789 A333 A358
7810 A359
772
A35J
773

Basically the two families from A & B overlap and all compete with each other.


User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 61, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 61541 times:

The purpose of this thread is allegedly "counting down" to the first flight of the A350, the market analysis of dilettantes seems best done elsewhere.

[Edited 2013-05-02 01:13:39]

User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 62, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 61117 times:

Thank you. Is the theme in the context of the contributions, questions and answers, rather too narrow or too wide?

User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 63, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 60959 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 56):
Boeing sees the A350 as competing with 787s.
Airbus sees the A350 as competing with 777s.

Which of the two statements is more true?

Neither. Airbus and Boeing both aim to 'differentiate' their product rather than aim for a direct head to head battle. Helps to make sure that they 'win' the sales that directly target a customers needs. With only two manufacturers, it makes sense.


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 64, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 60408 times:

Is the number of grains of truth in different statements each getting the number of different answers to the one question, and would be therefore the first response from @oldeuropean rather wrong?

And is the following statement also rather wrong?
With the help of Google translated from german http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350 to English: "So is developed in fact a more modern competitor to the Boeing 777 series, however also in terms of capacity an bigger alternative to the technologically comparable Boeing 787."

[Edited 2013-05-02 06:01:27]

User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 65, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 59623 times:

Agence France-Presse: The 777X faces competition from Boeing's European arch-rival Airbus, whose new A350, a twin-engine long-haul jetliner, is expected to enter service in the second half of 2014.

Boeing spokeswoman Karen Crabtree: The 777X will be "the world's largest and most efficient twin-engine airplane."

http://www.industryweek.com/product-...n-launch-new-777-plane-moves-ahead


User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 66, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 59412 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 56):
Boeing sees the A350 as competing with 787s.

I have seen Boeing argue the opposite. I guess when you are trying to sell the 787 you say the 350 competes with the 777 and when you are selling the 777 you say it competes with the 787  . So it competes with both and neither.

tortugamon

From Aspire Aviation


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 67, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 58505 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 66):

Thanks for the solution of riddle.

Amazing logic at Boeing.


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 68, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 58348 times:

Rumor of http://doubledecker.boards.net: "MSN1 will roll out in 10 days.."

Monday 13rd May?

See:
Quoting Bogi (Reply 34):
Is on Friday 3rd May, Monday 13rd May or on Thursday 23rd May roll-out ceremony of the A350?


User currently offlineAlpage From United Kingdom, joined Mar 2013, 42 posts, RR: 0
Reply 69, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 58192 times:

If so...Airbus is really aiming for Le Bourget despite their press release... Thank God already got my tickets for it. Can't wait !!!!

User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 70, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 57764 times:

"Alestis Aerospace and Teams testing laboratory, located in Aeropolis (aerospace technology park of Andalusia) in Spain, have announced that they have achieved the FFC First Flight Clearance for the Tail Cone (section 19.1). Airbus rescued the company after the management of the main shareholder Alcor Group had seriously compromised the development of the A350 program."

Alestis achieves the First Flight clearance for the tail cone of the A350 XWB


User currently offlinegoosebayguy From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2009, 401 posts, RR: 0
Reply 71, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 56797 times:

So Boeing say the 350 competes with the 777 but is heavier than the 787? Weird way to compare that way. Also shows the 350 will beat the 777.

User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 72, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 54482 times:

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 71):
So Boeing say the 350 competes with the 777 but is heavier than the 787? Weird way to compare that way. Also shows the 350 will beat the 777.

Yes, that's a bit strange.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 73, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 54292 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 45):
You think, MSN001 will painted this or next week, then be immediately handed on to the Airbus Flight Test team, for the first time no roll-out event and after the first flight the first official presentation in Le Bourget on the static display?

Airbus does not need to get the aircraft flying by the to do business. In todays business world you don't have to have an operating model at a show. The airlines that are going to buy the aircraft, will buy the aircraft regardless of the show and if it's flying in it. An airline executive would not be at the show and suddenly have a revelation that "Oh, gee, that aircraft is flying and now we can consider it over the competition. If an airline is interested, they would already have expressed interest in purchasing it and the OEMs would already be wooing them well before and after this show. In this day and age these shows are just that. Shows and not a lot of actual selling goes on these days. Computers and conference calls and Webinars are much more productive methods of doing business without all the expense of physically being at the particular event.



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineEagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1833 posts, RR: 2
Reply 74, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 54251 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting brilondon (Reply 73):
Airbus does not need to get the aircraft flying by the to do business. In todays business world you don't have to have an operating model at a show. The airlines that are going to buy the aircraft, will buy the aircraft regardless of the show and if it's flying in it. An airline executive would not be at the show and suddenly have a revelation that "Oh, gee, that aircraft is flying and now we can consider it over the competition. If an airline is interested, they would already have expressed interest in purchasing it and the OEMs would already be wooing them well before and after this show.

Most people realise this salient fact......numbers sell aircraft not emotions.

However getting the A350 airborne at La Bourget would be a major PR coup for Airbus.....showing "on schedule development" as opposed to the problems that Boeing have encountered. Regardless of the actual facts Airbus would get a positve headlines in the media.

*by "on schedule" I refer to the Airbus revised timetable rather than the 1 we were promised several years ago.


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 75, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 53797 times:

Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 74):
However getting the A350 airborne at La Bourget would be a major PR coup for Airbus.....showing "on schedule development" as opposed to the problems that Boeing have encountered. Regardless of the actual facts Airbus would get a positive headlines in the media.

*by "on schedule" I refer to the Airbus revised timetable rather than the 1 we were promised several years ago.

That is open to interpretation as you mentioned they revised the timetable a few years ago and even redesigned from scratch the A350 if I am not mistaken after the initial success of the 787 in terms of sales. I get the PR value of flying at Le Bourget, but at what cost? What I am saying is that it is not the end of the world if they don't get A350 in the air before the show. What I would see as more positive press would be that they get it flying without the problems that seem to plague the last few aircraft to be introduced. I think that they should take their time and get it right is basically what I am saying instead of rushing it to completion and then wasting time correcting issues that come about after they get it to market only to have problems surface after it is in the air.

The way I see it is that Boeing was forced to get its 787 flying before all the bugs were worked out. The same goes for the A380 with the issue of having engines fail in mid flight or developing cracks in the wings which I personally believe was because of the weight of the aircraft and the strain on the wings which caused the issues they had. How is that playing in the press right now?



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3947 posts, RR: 4
Reply 76, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 53728 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 75):
The way I see it is that Boeing was forced to get its 787 flying before all the bugs were worked out. The same goes for the A380 with the issue of having engines fail in mid flight or developing cracks in the wings which I personally believe was because of the weight of the aircraft and the strain on the wings which caused the issues they had. How is that playing in the press right now?

I can't comment on the 787, but the A380 certainy wasn't rushed to first flight - the engine failure issue was a RR manufacturing issue, not a design fault, as was the wing crack issue.

Tell me, how do you find and fix a manufacturing issue in a regime of test designed to find design issues?


User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10023 posts, RR: 96
Reply 77, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 54039 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting brilondon (Reply 75):
The same goes for the A380 with the issue of having engines fail in mid flight or developing cracks in the wings which I personally believe was because of the weight of the aircraft and the strain on the wings which caused the issues they had

???
The A380's wings have some of the lowest wing loadings known. The cracks were caused by an inadequate material selection. It related to the weight of the A380 only insofar as the choice was driven by the weight of the material.
The revised brackets add about 80kg to the airframe, for a bit of context
And the engines?
As Moo says, that was a poorly manufactured lubricating pipe.
Neither of these issues was remotely influenced by when the A380 flew

Rgds


User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 78, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 53561 times:

Quoting goosebayguy (Reply 71):
So Boeing say the 350 competes with the 777 but is heavier than the 787? Weird way to compare that way. Also shows the 350 will beat the 777.

I think Boeing's point is that the 787 is much lighter than the 350 because it has less structure. As airlines seem to be interested in 3-3-3 seating for both airplanes Boeing is attempting to show that they 787 has an inherent advantage. Yes the 350 structure will be lighter than the 777 and Airbus can produce the same diagram as above to show that. The difference is that the 777 will fit 10-wide 17.4" seats while the 350 will not. Also there is an advantage in J as well. BA for example has a 2-4-2 set up on their 777s that they will most likely not be able to do on the A350.

Airline preference and route needs will help airlines make the decision that is right for them but at this point it is premature to say who exactly will 'beat' the other (unless you are not talking about the 777X because the 350 should handily beat the current 777).

tortugamon


User currently offlinebrilondon From Canada, joined Aug 2005, 4226 posts, RR: 1
Reply 79, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 53427 times:

Quoting astuteman (Reply 77):
The A380's wings have some of the lowest wing loadings known. The cracks were caused by an inadequate material selection. It related to the weight of the A380 only insofar as the choice was driven by the weight of the material.
The revised brackets add about 80kg to the airframe, for a bit of context
And the engines?
As Moo says, that was a poorly manufactured lubricating pipe.
Neither of these issues was remotely influenced by when the A380 flew

That was my point. If the cracks were caused by poor choice in material, should that not have been picked up with proper testing of a full maxed out weight? Would the RR powerplant issue not have shown up in testing as well? Why did it take an incident with an airline to find out about this issue?



Rush for ever; Yankees all the way!!
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 80, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 53399 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 79):
Why did it take an incident with an airline to find out about this issue?

Because that's how everything in life works: you cannot discover all issues with testing. It's nearly impossible to simulate all possible scenarios.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineWingedMigrator From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 2212 posts, RR: 56
Reply 81, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 53276 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 79):
should that not have been picked up with proper testing of a full maxed out weight?

No. It was a fatigue problem, where the issue isn't how much load is applied but rather how the material behaves after being loaded for a huge number of cycles.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 79):
Would the RR powerplant issue not have shown up in testing as well?

Also material fatigue, due to manufacturing errors, that surfaced after a large number of cycles.

Quoting brilondon (Reply 79):
Why did it take an incident with an airline to find out about this issue?

Because you can't test every product coming off an assembly line to its full rated lifetime... That would only consume the lifetime and render the product worthless. By definition, issues that surface well into the lifetime of an airliner will do so while in airline service.


User currently offlineEagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1833 posts, RR: 2
Reply 82, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 53300 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting brilondon (Reply 75):
I get the PR value of flying at Le Bourget, but at what cost? What I am saying is that it is not the end of the world if they don't get A350 in the air before the show. What I would see as more positive press would be that they get it flying without the problems that seem to plague the last few aircraft to be introduced. I think that they should take their time and get it right is basically what I am saying instead of rushing it to completion and then wasting time correcting issues that come about after they get it to market only to have problems surface after it is in the air.

Well Airbus have 'officially' ruled out a display at La Bourget. So they are following your logic of not working towards a PR/Marketing related target (As Apple have done a few times over the last decade)

Airbus are not aiming for La Bourget, but if you were the head of the first flight team, of course you would have a little bit of ambition to be able to present your baby at 'your home airshow'. As a company of course Airbus are just focusing on their first flight program and not being swayed by any external factors.


User currently offlinedouglasyxz From Germany, joined Jan 2013, 98 posts, RR: 0
Reply 83, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 52850 times:

Does it make sense to just fly over the place of Paris Air Show without any prior notice to the visitors? If you do so, you would make sure all cameras are spotting the aircraft, which means you'd probably have to leak out a little information ahead. If you can't make the flight, which is highly reasonable in the early stage of flight test, then you earn disappointment instead of positive PR.

User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 84, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 52217 times:

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 81):
where the issue isn't how much load is applied but rather how the material behaves after being loaded for a huge number of cycles.

Plus, it was very difficult to simulate the behavior of the materials on 30,000 feet in cold temperatures far below zero.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 85, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 52033 times:

Quoting brilondon (Reply 79):
That was my point. If the cracks were caused by poor choice in material, should that not have been picked up with proper testing of a full maxed out weight? Would the RR powerplant issue not have shown up in testing as well? Why did it take an incident with an airline to find out about this issue?

My recollection is that there was no problem at all with the load on the wings, they handled that easily, it was the different expansion/contraction rates of different materials where they were mated along a plane. That only showed up over time as continual temperature changes showed up the stresses that were induced by different contraction rates that occurred because of those temperature changes. The planes could keep flying quite safely for a period of times while those cracks were still small and had not yet grown significantly. They are, of course a major pain in the posterior to remedy, as major wing components have to be removed and replaced. Airbus has to carry the cost of the replacement, the airlines have to carry the cost of the down time.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 86, posted (1 year 4 months 2 weeks ago) and read 51523 times:

Quoting RickNRoll (Reply 85):
That only showed up over time as continual temperature changes showed up the stresses that were induced by different contraction rates that occurred because of those temperature changes.

It only showed up at certain places on the wing and part of the reason was that there were preset tension at load 0 on those places, these loads came in during manufacturing which was unintended. This plus a Al variant that was a tick less resistant to these kind of not foreseen tensions caused the fatigue crack to appear after some 1500-2000 cycles.

Nothing one could detect in flight testing unless you really measured what residual tensions you had after the wing was manufactured (and it might not have been there if it was caused due to manufacturing variability).



Non French in France
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4397 posts, RR: 2
Reply 87, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 51195 times:

And as early in the test prgram do you get permission to fly over Paris?

User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 88, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 50321 times:

Rumour: Tonight to the paint shop.

User currently offlinekl911 From Czech Republic, joined Jul 2003, 5135 posts, RR: 12
Reply 89, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 50062 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 88):
Rumour: Tonight to the paint shop.

Great! Let's hope it is true. How long does it take the first time to paint it?


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 90, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 50076 times:

Not longer than a week.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 91, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 50103 times:

Quoting kl911 (Reply 89):
Great! Let's hope it is true. How long does it take the first time to paint it?

Yes, let's hope.

... "rumoured to be headed into the paint shop at Toulouse tonight, a further sign that the first flight of the new Airbus family is drawing closer."

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/planetalk...-the-next-gulf-war-between-a-and-b


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4736 posts, RR: 39
Reply 92, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 49568 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Bogi (Reply 88):
Rumour: Tonight to the paint shop.

That would be great. Let's hope the rumor is true.  .


User currently offlineabba From Denmark, joined Jun 2005, 1341 posts, RR: 2
Reply 93, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 49431 times:

I am looking forward to see if Airbus is really going to paint the windows area in the font black as on their renderings and how that will look like in real life.

User currently offlineAADC10 From United States of America, joined Nov 2004, 2091 posts, RR: 0
Reply 94, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 49253 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 78):
The difference is that the 777 will fit 10-wide 17.4" seats while the 350 will not.

There is no way that a 17.4" wide seat will fit in a 10 abreast 777. A 9-Y A350 seat will be wider than a 10-Y 777 seat. Not by much, perhaps 1/2" but a 10-Y 777 will be more cramped than a 9-Y A350.

Some of Boeing's claims are kind of spurious. Of course the A350 is bigger and heavier than the 787, it is a larger plane overall and its largest model will be significantly larger than the 789. Going on to compare the size to the 777 is also odd since they point out that the 777 is wider than the A350 but do not mention that the A350 is substantially lighter.


User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 393 posts, RR: 0
Reply 95, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 49127 times:

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 94):
There is no way that a 17.4" wide seat will fit in a 10 abreast 777. A 9-Y A350 seat will be wider than a 10-Y 777 seat. Not by much, perhaps 1/2" but a 10-Y 777 will be more cramped than a 9-Y A350.

Some of Boeing's claims are kind of spurious. Of course the A350 is bigger and heavier than the 787, it is a larger plane overall and its largest model will be significantly larger than the 789. Going on to compare the size to the 777 is also odd since they point out that the 777 is wider than the A350 but do not mention that the A350 is substantially lighter.

Back-of-the-envelope calculations (albeit basic) tell a different story, however. If you believe that current 777's are flying around with 10X configurations having 17" wide seats, and you add the rumored 4 inches to that, you get an extra .4" per seat...not sure how you can discount that. You *can* question whether the current seats are actually 17" wide, or question whether Boeing will actually be able to add 4 inches in cabin width, but if things turn out as they've been predicted, the additional space is more than feasible. If the seat widths are the same, then sure, an A350 @ 9-Y would have to have wider aisles if seat widths were the same, but as to seat widths, I don't see your case.

(And let's be clear that we're talking 77X here, not the current 777.)

[Edited 2013-05-06 15:21:45]

User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1580 posts, RR: 3
Reply 96, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 48878 times:

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 95):
Back-of-the-envelope calculations (albeit basic) tell a different story

Back of the envelope calculations for seat width:

Seat guru has BA economy seating 9 across @ 17.5 inches

Seat guru has EK economy seating 10 across @ 17 inches

So clearly the additional seat has cost 1/2 inch in width.

Airbus on its website has A350 XWB economy seating 9 across @ a 'generous' 18 inches

So using the same up gauge from 9 to 10 across seating of -0.5 inches for the A350XWB, 10 across at 17.5 inches width should be possible which would give the same 'comfort' as today's 777 in 9 across.

Adding your theoretical 0.4 inch per seat for the 777X would bring it up to 17.4 inches per seat in 10 wide i.e still not as generous as a A350XWB in 10 wide.



BV
User currently offlinedavs5032 From United States of America, joined Sep 2010, 393 posts, RR: 0
Reply 97, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 48754 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 96):
So using the same up gauge from 9 to 10 across seating of -0.5 inches for the A350XWB, 10 across at 17.5 inches width should be possible which would give the same 'comfort' as today's 777 in 9 across.

Adding your theoretical 0.4 inch per seat for the 777X would bring it up to 17.4 inches per seat in 10 wide i.e still not as generous as a A350XWB in 10 wide.

I should have been more clear, I was in a rush and didn't get the point across well. I agree wholeheartedly that the 77X in 10-Y would have narrower seats than an A350 @ 9-Y. My main disagreement was with the statement:

Quoting AADC10 (Reply 94):
There is no way that a 17.4" wide seat will fit in a 10 abreast 777.

But apart from that, I agree with mostly everything you say. I am, however, skeptical of this part of your statement, (obviously Airbus' words, not your own):

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 96):
Airbus on its website has A350 XWB economy seating 9 across @ a 'generous' 18 inches

Given that the A350 is to have a cabin less than 5" wider than the 787, which is limited to (IIRC) 9-abreast with a seat width in the low 17" range, I don't see how the A350 could accommodate 18" seat width, much less a "generous" 18"..whatever that means. But then again I'm just splitting hairs now.. 


User currently offlineRayChuang From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 8016 posts, RR: 5
Reply 98, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 48649 times:

Speaking of which, any news on when will Airbus roll out the completed and fully-painted A350XWB-900 prototype?

User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1580 posts, RR: 3
Reply 99, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 48591 times:

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 97):

Given that the A350 is to have a cabin less than 5" wider than the 787, which is limited to (IIRC) 9-abreast with a seat width in the low 17" range, I don't see how the A350 could accommodate 18" seat width, much less a "generous" 18"..whatever that means. But then again I'm just splitting hairs now..

If a manufacturer puts up a definite number on its website like Airbus has done in this instance you have to assume that they can make it work, its pointless 2nd guessing them. On what basis are you second guessing the seat size of a company that has spent years and billions of dollars developing a product? 18 inches is 18 inches, its not a nebulous target like MTOW or fuel burn you are just going to have to trust them, at least until any credible sources suggest that they cannot do it and I am not aware of any sources at this time.

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 98):
Speaking of which, any news on when will Airbus roll out the completed and fully-painted A350XWB-900 prototype?

Monday 13th May 2013 is where the smart money is.



BV
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 100, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 48563 times:

The rumor probably came from: http://doubledecker.boards.net/thread/31?page=13

"Got some more info, MSN1 will move to the paint hangar on Monday May 6th.
I informed them, but they expect a movement during the night."


User currently offlineknoxibus From France, joined Aug 2007, 260 posts, RR: 23
Reply 101, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 48185 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

MSN 001 was moved to the paint hangar in the late afternoon of the 6th May.


No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 102, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 48381 times:

Quoting knoxibus (Reply 101):
MSN 001 was moved to the paint hangar in the late afternoon of the 6th May.

Hard to believe that spotters could not take make any pictures of she.


User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 103, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 48304 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 96):
Back of the envelope calculations for seat width:

Seat guru has BA economy seating 9 across @ 17.5 inches

Seat guru has EK economy seating 10 across @ 17 inches

So clearly the additional seat has cost 1/2 inch in width.

Well Qatar's 777 is 9 across @18.9 inches. Does that mean that EK's 10th seat cost an additional 1.9 inches per seat? (yes it does)

http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Qat...Qatar_Airways_Boeing_777-300ER.php

Current consensus is that the A350 at 10 across is 16.4 inches per seat.

tortugamon


User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1580 posts, RR: 3
Reply 104, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 48197 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 103):
Well Qatar's 777 is 9 across @18.9 inches. Does that mean that EK's 10th seat cost an additional 1.9 inches per seat? (yes it does)

Eh? Cathays 777 seats are 18.5 inches wide so I guess that BA has very wide aisles, that's very odd..

Airbus guidance seems to be A330 at 9 across seat width will be A350XWB at 10 across so 16.5 inches, my arse might fit into that space but my shoulders won't...



BV
User currently offlineaviaponcho From France, joined Aug 2011, 619 posts, RR: 8
Reply 105, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 48192 times:

And the 18" wide 9 abreast A350 is not with non standard 1.5" armrest an 18.1 aisle (acaps 2013 ... it's 17"7 only with then according to acaps 2011 various documents (and 18.35" aisle)
It seems that it can be possinle to go 9 abreast with 18" and 2" armrest and 17" aisle

According to boeing 10 abreast 777 is 17" seat cushion, 2" armrest and 17 " aisle
And 9 abreast 787 is 17.2" seat cushion, 2" armrest and 18 in aisle ... so it can be 17.4" wide with reduced 17" aisle ... the magical 17.4" figure we see for the 777X


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 106, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 48195 times:

Quoting knoxibus (Reply 101):
MSN 001 was moved to the paint hangar in the late afternoon of the 6th May.

Thanks.

Is this information or the rumor not too mysterious, to be true?


User currently offlineknoxibus From France, joined Aug 2007, 260 posts, RR: 23
Reply 107, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 48056 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

This is real info. Several people have seen her being moved. Maybe the spotters missed it because she was moved to a close-by paint shop. And maybe not all spotters put their pics on a.net also (or did not yet re-work their pics, who knows).


No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
User currently offlineFlyingAY From Finland, joined Jun 2007, 702 posts, RR: 0
Reply 108, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 47899 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 103):
Current consensus is that the A350 at 10 across is 16.4 inches per seat.

I can't believe you're making this so difficult! There is a certain width available for seats and ailes. You subtract the minimum permitted aisle width x2 from that and assuming that the seat width is constant (each seat have their own armrests, which might not be the case) you divide the remaining amount with the number of seats and bang, you've got your seat width. It does not make sense to compare EK, BA or CX figures, since we don't know how they have been measured and rounded or if the aisle width is equal on both cases.

Sorry for being lazy and not digging up the manufacturers websites, but Is the cabin width a published spec?


User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 109, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 47669 times:

Quoting knoxibus (Reply 107):
This is real info. Several people have seen her being moved. Maybe the spotters missed it because she was moved to a close-by paint shop. And maybe not all spotters put their pics on a.net also (or did not yet re-work their pics, who knows).

Well, however it looks as though this could be also a rumor or a information of one and the same source.


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 110, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 47736 times:

@Bogi Obvious you don't know knoxibus. If you have a look in the previous A350 production threads you will understand why his information is correct  


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12541 posts, RR: 25
Reply 111, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 47562 times:

IMHO we've had enough of this quibbling about seat widths - the thread is about A350XWB Countdown To Launch!

Quoting knoxibus (Reply 107):
This is real info. Several people have seen her being moved. Maybe the spotters missed it because she was moved to a close-by paint shop. And maybe not all spotters put their pics on a.net also (or did not yet re-work their pics, who knows).

Cheers to Knoxibus for this most welcome news!



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 112, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 47337 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 110):
Some skepticism still seems appropriate.

Nevertheless, the last three or four words of the following superscription are wonderful:
Hexcel Celebrates Partnership with Airbus as A350 XWB Gets Ready for Take-Off


User currently onlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1611 posts, RR: 7
Reply 113, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 47113 times:

Quoting Bogi (Reply 112):
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 110):

Some skepticism still seems appropriate.

There are a few people on this forum whoes "rumours" I have come to accept as almost-a-fact, knoxibus is one of those people  

Loving this countdown, can't wait to see her where she belongs, in the air!



Live From Amsterdam!
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 114, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 46889 times:

Quoting travelavnut (Reply 113):
Yes, and equal the next wonderful rumor is the first flight of the A350 on 11 June.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30977 posts, RR: 86
Reply 115, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 3 hours ago) and read 46496 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting davs5032 (Reply 97):
Given that the A350 is to have a cabin less than 5" wider than the 787, which is limited to 9-abreast with a seat width in the low 17" range, I don't see how the A350 could accommodate 18" seat width...

An A350 should be able to do 3+3+3 with an 18" cushion width if they shrink the aisles to 16".


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 116, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 46152 times:

That's how they advertise it I believe.


Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13110 posts, RR: 100
Reply 117, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 5 days ago) and read 46043 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 66):
I have seen Boeing argue the opposite.

First, thank you for the links. But some of that added weight the A350 has over the 787 adds value! The 20% larger wings will mean a lower wing loading combined with a improved wingspan. Thus more efficient cruise (better wing L/D ratio from span) at a higher (less dense air) altitude. The A350 is simply optimized for slightly longer routes.

The larger and heavier Trents will certainly burn less fuel for the A350.

Also, the larger horizontal stabilizer will help with short field performance.

I simply see a plane more optimized for missions over 4,000 nm (the A350).   

I see the A350 and 787 competing for a *long* time.   

Either way, RR will benefit.  

However, there is weight for a wider cabin that will generate zero additional revenue. I do think the cargo will benefit though...

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 103):
Current consensus is that the A350 at 10 across is 16.4 inches per seat.

That would work for AirAsiaX.   

Lightaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineBogi From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 118, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 45808 times:

The Spotters make hopefully not that: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/spotten

User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 119, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 45318 times:

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 104):
Airbus guidance seems to be A330 at 9 across seat width will be A350XWB at 10 across so 16.5 inches, my arse might fit into that space but my shoulders won't...

I have been on Air-Asia-X 9 across A330. I have to say, I was impressed with the number of people they could fit on a plane that size. This was a Melbourne to KL flight, so it was not just a short hop. The seats, considering how tightly we were packed in, were comfortable. The price was affordable, which is why I was a passenger. No complaints from me.


User currently offlineAsiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 120, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 45289 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 117):
However, there is weight for a wider cabin that will generate zero additional revenue. I do think the cargo will benefit though...

Nor SQ or CX has any 787 on order and I believe the reason being that they only could fit 8 abreast in a 787. Hence they saw the wider A350 cabin adding so much value that 787 was out of the game.



SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 121, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 45033 times:

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 120):
Nor SQ or CX has any 787 on order and I believe the reason being that they only could fit 8 abreast in a 787.

Doesn't SQ still have 20 789s on order?


User currently offlineAsiaflyer From Singapore, joined May 2007, 1135 posts, RR: 0
Reply 122, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 45043 times:

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 121):
Doesn't SQ still have 20 789s on order?


The 787 order was transferred to Scoot. SQ instead ordered another 20 A350.



SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
User currently offlineRickNRoll From Afghanistan, joined Jan 2012, 824 posts, RR: 0
Reply 123, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 44877 times:

Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 120):
Nor SQ or CX has any 787 on order and I believe the reason being that they only could fit 8 abreast in a 787. Hence they saw the wider A350 cabin adding so much value that 787 was out of the game.

One would almost suspect that Boeing and Airbus have carefully staked out the 8/9/10/11 across seat markets. There is overlap, but a guaranteed nice slice of the pie for everyone.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 124, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 43897 times:

No 'suspect' about it, in my view, RickNRoll.   Starting a bit late, and needing to compete against two aeroplanes with one (plus eventually replace the A330), Airbus really had no choice but largely to aim the A350 at the 'gap' between the B787 and the B777.

Their only possible problem at this stage is that the vast majority of the orders so far are for the A359; but that's probably only because it will be the first model to enter service (hopefully in 2014).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350_XWB

By contrast, Boeing's orders for the 787 are just about evenly-divided between the 788 and 789 - and they already have so many that they can probably afford to concentrate on production and delivery for a couple of years, rather than worry about A350 competition:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Boeing_787_orders_and_deliveries

It's a different story with the 777. As far as I can tell (scroll down to 'Orders and Deliveries') the 772 and the basic 773 are just about out of production. Lots of orders still on the books for the 773ER and the freighter, though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_777

Whether the apparent demise of the 772 is due to a saturated market or the popularity of the 787 combined with the looming advent of the A350, one can't tell. All one can really say is 'interesting times ahead.'  

[Edited 2013-05-08 20:04:32]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineConfuscius From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 3862 posts, RR: 1
Reply 125, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 43755 times:

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 98):
any news on when will Airbus roll out the completed and fully-painted A350XWB-900 prototype?
Paint job but no 'rollout' party for newest Airbus jet

LONDON (Reuters) - Airbus has started painting the A350, a sign it is approaching a maiden flight, but has bowed to the industry's increasingly pragmatic mood by deciding against a traditional "rollout" for its newest jet.

Asked recently whether Airbus would hold an A350 rollout ceremony, Airbus Chief Executive Fabrice Bregier told Reuters, "Probably not. We'll go straight to our first flight."


http://www.chicagotribune.com/busine...bre9470r6-20130508,0,3201883.story


Darn, I was looking forward to Jerry Lewis and David Hasselhoff entertaining the French and Germans respectively.



Ain't I a stinker?
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 126, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 43524 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 124):
Whether the apparent demise of the 772 is due to a saturated market or the popularity of the 787 combined with the looming advent of the A350, one can't tell.

The current 787 models are not really a one-for-one 772 replacement. The ever-improving A333 and the A359 have played no small part in 'stalling' 772 orders.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineastuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10023 posts, RR: 96
Reply 127, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 12 hours ago) and read 43499 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 124):
Airbus really had no choice but largely to aim the A350 at the 'gap' between the B787 and the B777.

They did

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 124):
Their only possible problem at this stage is that the vast majority of the orders so far are for the A359; but that's probably only because it will be the first model to enter service (hopefully in 2014).

In the first few years of sales, most 787 orders were 787-8, as that entered service first.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 124):
By contrast, Boeing's orders for the 787 are just about evenly-divided between the 788 and 789 -

They are now. So is the "problem" that the 787-8 doesn't sell so well any more?   

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 124):
Whether the apparent demise of the 772 is due to a saturated market or the popularity of the 787 combined with the looming advent of the A350, one can't tell.

772 sales were already flagging by the time the 787 and A350 hove into view, as far as I can see.

Rgds


User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 128, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 43126 times:

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 125):
LONDON (Reuters) - Airbus has started painting the A350, a sign it is approaching a maiden flight, but has bowed to the industry's increasingly pragmatic mood by deciding against a traditional "rollout" for its newest jet.

Asked recently whether Airbus would hold an A350 rollout ceremony, Airbus Chief Executive Fabrice Bregier told Reuters, "Probably not. We'll go straight to our first flight."

Increasingly pragmatic mood?

Bombardier effectively "rolled-out" the CS100 two months ago with an incomplete and unpainted aircraft by calling the event an "update" instead.

See: http://airteamimages.net/bombardier-cs100_50001_bombardier_171191.html

Boeing never marked the "roll-out" of 747-8F with a ceremony of any kind, but did stage a very splashy event for the "unveiling" of the Intercontinenal.

Seems odd that Airbus would completely eschew the opportunity to stage a ceremony to formally "roll-out" the first aiircraft of their major new program, especially when a complete and painted aircraft will be available for such an event. It's hard to believe John Leahy has lost his penchant for staging a laser light show to mark such an "important" program milestone.


User currently offlineoldeuropean From Germany, joined May 2005, 2091 posts, RR: 4
Reply 129, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 43072 times:

It's a wise decision to focus on the schedule- Who needs roll out parties? Can't wait to see that beauty, ready and freshly painted.

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 125):
Darn, I was looking forward to Jerry Lewis and David Hasselhoff entertaining the French and Germans respectively.

Why on earth do you Americans believe in this popular myth that the Germans like the Hoff?   

Neither me or anyone I know here likes this clown, his bad acting, or his stupid songs. BTW he's from your country. Big grin

[Edited 2013-05-09 01:27:37]


Wer nichts weiss muss alles glauben
User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4917 posts, RR: 4
Reply 130, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 43136 times:

Off to the paint shop...

Quoting
Photos of MSN001 with engines attached and being moved into paint shop.


Source:
http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intel...st-look-at-a-complete-airbus-a350/
EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3761 posts, RR: 11
Reply 131, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 43049 times:

Quoting oldeuropean (Reply 129):

Quoting Confuscius (Reply 125):
Darn, I was looking forward to Jerry Lewis and David Hasselhoff entertaining the French and Germans respectively.

Why on earth do you Americans believe in this popular myth that the Germans like the Hoff?   

Neither me or anyone I know here likes this clown, his bad acting, or his stupid songs. BTW he's from your country.

Ditto Jerry Lewis. Never understood where that myth came from. 95% of people in France have no clue who he even is...

I find the Hoff funny though. At least he doesn't take himself too seriously...

Anyhow, what is that red structure underneath the tail of the aircraft in EK413's pics? The VMU scraping pad?



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 132, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 43003 times:

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 128):
Seems odd that Airbus would completely eschew the opportunity to stage a ceremony to formally "roll-out" the first aiircraft of their major new program, especially when a complete and painted aircraft will be available for such an event. It's hard to believe John Leahy has lost his penchant for staging a laser light show to mark such an "important" program milestone.

Sure he would love to have a ceremony but he's not making all the decisions. Secondly, starting the flight testing is far more important than a laser show. And I'm sure Airbus customers are thinking the same way.

Just imagine what Mr. Baker would do with Leahy if he can't get his aircraft in 2014   



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 133, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 43007 times:

Quoting francoflier (Reply 131):
Anyhow, what is that red structure underneath the tail of the aircraft in EK413's pics? The VMU scraping pad?

Yes, that's for the tail strike test.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7I6SSE88fF0



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 134, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 42864 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 132):
Secondly, starting the flight testing is far more important than a laser show. And I'm sure Airbus customers are thinking the same way.


If the plane can't be spared for a few hours to stage a "proper" roll-out, then there's something seriously wrong. In the case of the 748i, the plane was out on the "fuel dock" at Everett less than two hours after the conclusion of the roll-out ceremony in the final assembly building. Hopefully this decision merely reflects a change in PR strategy rather than being driven by the demands of the flight-test program.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 135, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 42638 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 133):
Yes, that's for the tail strike test.

Sincere thanks, KarelXWB - learned something from it!

Of COURSE - in an actual 'first flight,' no-one knows for certain what the right speed/angle of attack will be for a successful take-off.

So there's the world of difference between an actual first flight (most likely a series of them, for testing purposes) and a 'ceremonial' one, in front of the general public, later on when everyone knows how the aeroplane will behave.

Still think, though, that Airbus should aim to get some 'private' first flights completed ASAP, and then 'demonstrate' the A350 at a 'roll-out' for VIPs - and also take it to as many air shows as they can. Basic marketing, IMO.........

[Edited 2013-05-09 03:09:42]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25242 posts, RR: 85
Reply 136, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 42681 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 135):
Still think, though, that Airbus should aim to get some 'private' first flights completed ASAP, and then 'demonstrate' the A350 at a 'roll-out' for VIPs

  

The big deal 787 roll-out wasn't such a good idea in retrospect.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 137, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 42227 times:

Quoting mariner (Reply 136):
The big deal 787 roll-out wasn't such a good idea in retrospect.

Boeing rolled-out a "Potemkin" aircraft for the sake of having a ceremony on a date (7-8-7) which was deemed significant and scheduled months in advance. I'm not sure what's the risk involved in having a traditional roll-out ceremony for an aircraft that has completed the final assembly process and looks to be close to being airworthy?

[Edited 2013-05-09 05:52:00]

User currently offlineCerecl From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 729 posts, RR: 0
Reply 138, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 42100 times:

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 137):
I'm not sure what's the risk involved in having a traditional roll-out ceremony for an aircraft that has completed the final assembly process and looks to be close to being airworthy?

So that when A350 encounters problem(s) leading to delays during the period from roll-out to EIS, no one can draw parallel to 787 rollout.
Ultimately, it is airlines that will order A350. If I were an airline executive considering an order I would rather see Airbus hard at work preparing the aircraft for first flight than nice videos/photos of a ceremony.


User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 139, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 42041 times:

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 138):
So that when A350 encounters problem(s) leading to delays during the period from roll-out to EIS, no one can draw parallel to 787 rollout.

Unless Airbus decides to substitute a "Potemkin" aircraft for the one we've seen in the photographs, what would be the relevant parallels?

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 138):
If I were an airline executive considering an order I would rather see Airbus hard at work preparing the aircraft for first flight than nice videos/photos of a ceremony.

You would represent a completely new breed of airline executive because these guys have been more than willing participants in these dog and pony shows for decades.


User currently offlineCerecl From Australia, joined Jul 2008, 729 posts, RR: 0
Reply 140, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 5 hours ago) and read 41972 times:

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 139):
nless Airbus decides to substitute a "Potemkin" aircraft for the one we've seen in the photographs, what would be the relevant parallels?

Flashy ceremonies followed by delays. The exact details do not have to be the same.

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 139):
You would represent a completely new breed of airline executive because these guys have been more than willing participants in these dog and pony shows for decades.

What I am saying is that whether a ceremony is held or not matters zilch to airline executives. In most cases, planes are purchased because money can made by them not because executives can have a nice photo opportunity. This is not to say ceremonies aren't important, it is just not so important at this stage of A350 development.


User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 141, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 4 hours ago) and read 41867 times:

Quoting Cerecl (Reply 140):

Sorry, I find the notion that eschewing a traditional roll-out ceremony, flashy or otherwise, would somehow insulate/immunize Airbus from criticism for some sort of potential programatic problem/failure down the road to be ludicrous. If I were an airline executive, I would ask myself why Airbus is breaking with tradition? If the the answer is it would be too taxing on the resources of the organisation to stage a roll-out ceremony, then I would have questions about whether that organisation is robust. Any way you cut it, it's a very odd move for an organisation which has never been shy about heavily promoting every last thing it does or accomplishes. Eschewing the opportunity to stage a roll-out ceremony for the A350 is completely at odds with Airbus' corporate culture to date.

[Edited 2013-05-09 07:33:42]

[Edited 2013-05-09 07:34:48]

User currently offlinemoo From Falkland Islands, joined May 2007, 3947 posts, RR: 4
Reply 142, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 41694 times:

The point isn't to insulate Airbus from talk a year from now, it's to eliminate the talk today. Can't criticise them for having a flashy, expensive roll out ceremony if they don't have one. Can't make comparisons between the A350XWB roll out ceremony and those of the A380 and 787 if you don't have a roll outt ceremony.

If you were an airline executive, and if you did spend any time mulling why Airbus didn't do a roll out ceremony, then you are mulling the wrong things - are you in charge of Kingfisher per chance?

You can't seriously be trying to argue that Airbus should throw a pointless party just because it's "tradition"?


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 143, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 41721 times:

Who cares about a roll out ceremony! Seriously, such a party is for customers, journalists and political people only. I'm waiting for:

- High-res pictures from the painted aircraft   
- A video showing the blue smoke rising up from the initial engine run   
- Watching the first flight   



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineEagleboy From Niue, joined Dec 2009, 1833 posts, RR: 2
Reply 144, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 3 hours ago) and read 41634 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 143):

Who cares about a roll out ceremony! Seriously, such a party is for customers, journalists and political people only. I'm waiting for:

- High-res pictures from the painted aircraft   
- A video showing the blue smoke rising up from the initial engine run   
- Watching the first flight

And these events will generate media attention of their own.....so Airbus will still get the PR value without a flashy 'roll-out ceremony'.


Funny thing about the 7-8-7 roll out date.....it was actually on the 8-7-7. Silly US dating system!


User currently offlinejvaljean From Belgium, joined Mar 2013, 69 posts, RR: 1
Reply 145, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 41470 times:

Quoting moo (Reply 142):

Why does a roll-out necessarily have to be flashy and expensive? Seems to me it can be done at a very modest cost and still garner significant media attention which is the primary objective of such events anyway.

Seems to me any executive in the industry who is the least bit sensient would notice and at least briefly contemplate such a significant deviation from industry tradition and prior company practise. To determine whether they would be necessarily favorably or unfavorably impressed by this particular circumstance would be a fool's errand. However, to argue that it wouldn't merit any contemplation on their part would be equally specious.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9097 posts, RR: 75
Reply 146, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 41469 times:

Quoting Eagleboy (Reply 144):
Funny thing about the 7-8-7 roll out date.....it was actually on the 8-7-7.

It was only when you expressed it like that that I realized it has almost been 6 years, how many have been delivered so far 50 ? I guess is that sort of track record they are trying to avoid.

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 145):
Why does a roll-out necessarily have to be flashy and expensive? Seems to me it can be done at a very modest cost and still garner significant media attention which is the primary objective of such events anyway.

Roll out does not mean much to me, it is when they aircraft rotates and leaves the ground for the first time, then it is an aircraft. I see the roll out as exciting as going to a modern art gallery.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12541 posts, RR: 25
Reply 147, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 41268 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 130):
Off to the paint shop...

At the risk of major flamage, I'll say I like the looks of the GE engines (you know, the ones the A350 Mk 1 was supposed to have) much better (even though I'm not a fan of GE's business practices)...

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 141):
If I were an airline executive, I would ask myself why Airbus is breaking with tradition? If the the answer is it would be too taxing on the resources of the organisation to stage a roll-out ceremony, then I would have questions about whether that organisation is robust.

I think most CEOs are used to the idea of cost containment these days.

I think the bigger impact would be on employee morale - they deserve a good party!

I suppose that will happen on the day of first flight?



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineBurkhard From Germany, joined Nov 2006, 4397 posts, RR: 2
Reply 148, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 40986 times:

Quoting Revelation (Reply 147):
I think most CEOs are used to the idea of cost containment these days.

Not if it affects their own luxury life style paid by their company or other companies if they haven't to pay taxes for it.


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25242 posts, RR: 85
Reply 149, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41010 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 137):
I'm not sure what's the risk involved in having a traditional roll-out ceremony for an aircraft that has completed the final assembly process and looks to be close to being airworthy?

I've never quite understood the point of any rollout. The first appearance of the A380 didn't stop the cynics.

I think first flight is the great moment.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30977 posts, RR: 86
Reply 150, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41021 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mariner (Reply 149):
I've never quite understood the point of any rollout.

Employee morale? If I had worked on bringing a new aircraft into the world, I'd like to celebrate it with a roll-out (as well as first flight, of course).


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 151, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41086 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 150):
Employee morale?

Now I wonder how those poor Boeing employees must have felt on 7-8-7   



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 152, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41350 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 126):
The current 787 models are not really a one-for-one 772 replacement.

I believe that the 789 is well positioned as a 772 replacement.

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/fl...nalysis-meet-boeings-777-200e.html


tortugamon


User currently offlinemariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 25242 posts, RR: 85
Reply 153, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41311 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Stitch (Reply 150):
Employee morale? If I had worked on bringing a new aircraft into the world, I'd like to celebrate it with a roll-out (as well as first flight, of course).

They can have rool-outs, or roll-arounds, up the wazoo, for the staff. But surely, the point of an aircraft is to fly?

All I remember of the A380 roll-out is a lot of hoopla involving a lot of politicians. But I shall always remember the moment the A380 left the ground for the first time.

mariner



aeternum nauta
User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2215 posts, RR: 8
Reply 154, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41327 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 143):
Who cares about a roll out ceremony! Seriously, such a party is for customers, journalists and political people only. I'm waiting for:

- High-res pictures from the painted aircraft   
- A video showing the blue smoke rising up from the initial engine run   
- Watching the first flight   

Amen to this!

I got really happy on the A380 FF, I even Cheered and did not go to work !!! weirdly enough the 787 after so many delays, did not get so excited, I flew, I just saud WOHA those wings really bend..and thats it...

I think Airbus is pulling an Apple textbook introduction:

Nobody knows anything for sure and there are tons or rumors and conflicting info, then they show it and give a huge PR show.

My guess is that they will fly on the Show, and they only make a small announcement on rollout, first flight...

TRB (fingers crossed)



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 155, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41396 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 152):
I believe that the 789 is well positioned as a 772 replacement.

Sure, unless one need those 20 extra seats (77E can seat 314 pax in a 10 abreast Y layout).

Quoting mariner (Reply 153):
All I remember of the A380 roll-out is a lot of hoopla involving a lot of politicians. But I shall always remember the moment the A380 left the ground for the first time.

Speeches, music, dancing, laser show etc. Hell you can't even get a clear view on the aircraft while it's inside the hanger.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-P-cT8D6nCo



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8362 posts, RR: 10
Reply 156, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41333 times:

I don't remember a thing about the A380 rollout but I'll never forget the first flight.
Airplanes are made to fly, not to be towed around by a tug  


User currently offlineEPA001 From Netherlands, joined Sep 2006, 4736 posts, RR: 39
Reply 157, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 41265 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting airbazar (Reply 156):
I don't remember a thing about the A380

I found a short video of that 2005 event.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEI2va6KBOU

[Edited 2013-05-09 12:53:33]

User currently offlineEK413 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 4917 posts, RR: 4
Reply 158, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 10 hours ago) and read 40727 times:

Nice comparison of the A350 vs B787

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7286/8720608653_5610823039_c.jpg

Source: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=103093594#post103093594

EK413



Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
User currently offlineBoeingVista From Australia, joined Jan 2009, 1580 posts, RR: 3
Reply 159, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 40339 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 158):

The scale is all wrong though.



BV
User currently offlinefrancoflier From France, joined Oct 2001, 3761 posts, RR: 11
Reply 160, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 40185 times:

The similarities between the main landing gears is a bit eerie.

Did both design use the VC-10 'multi-strut' gear'approach?
I know it had to do with reducing stress on the main CRFP wing spar, I'm guessing the engineering constraints were similar.



Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit posting...
User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 161, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 40154 times:

Quoting francoflier (Reply 160):
Did both design use the VC-10 'multi-strut' gear'approach?

They both used the Boeing standard approach, Messier learned that it was better when doing the MLG for the 787 and told Airbus for the A350 IMO. The VC10 explanation was to avoid saying "like Boeing does it". AFAIK B has have had this design since 767.



Non French in France
User currently offlineJumpjet From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 280 posts, RR: 0
Reply 162, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 39817 times:

Is there anywhere that I can get a look at some silhouettes of various airliners scaled one against another please, as I'm trying to get my head around the relative sizes of these things.....?   

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 159):
The scale is all wrong though.


User currently onlinetravelavnut From Netherlands, joined May 2010, 1611 posts, RR: 7
Reply 163, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 39646 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 158):
Nice comparison of the A350 vs B787
Quoting francoflier (Reply 160):

The similarities between the main landing gears is a bit eerie.

Funny, the similarity of the MLG doors is very striking to me! Of course I am not a technical person, so I am probably missing a lot of big differences, but the little flap/door in front of the left MLG door looks like a carbon-copy to me!

EDIT:

Quoting ferpe:

They both used the Boeing standard approach, Messier learned that it was better when doing the MLG for the 787 and told Airbus for the A350 IMO. The VC10 explanation was to avoid saying "like Boeing does it". AFAIK B has have had this design since 767.

Aahh that explains a lot, thanks Ferpe!!



Absolutely loving the winglets, absolutely gorgeous!

[Edited 2013-05-10 04:46:10]


Live From Amsterdam!
User currently onlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1449 posts, RR: 2
Reply 164, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 39410 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 161):
Quoting francoflier (Reply 160):
Did both design use the VC-10 'multi-strut' gear'approach?

They both used the Boeing standard approach, Messier learned that it was better when doing the MLG for the 787 and told Airbus for the A350 IMO. The VC10 explanation was to avoid saying "like Boeing does it". AFAIK B has have had this design since 767.

Do I understand what you are saying right? The MLG is not done like in the VC10?

The VC10 being a bit older than the B 767.


User currently offlineferpe From France, joined Nov 2010, 2804 posts, RR: 59
Reply 165, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 6 hours ago) and read 39342 times:

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 164):
Do I understand what you are saying right? The MLG is not done like in the VC10?

The VC10 being a bit older than the B 767.

In total 40 VC10 were built whereof 29 for the captive BOAC in the 1960ies. Furhter it was a very odd ariframe configurtion with double rear engines, way different to the A350. To use that as a reference for what you do 2010 when the schema has been used on every Boeing airliners since the 707 is a little like "yes we drive on the right side of the road as Vietnam does".



Non French in France
User currently onlinemjoelnir From Iceland, joined Feb 2013, 1449 posts, RR: 2
Reply 166, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 5 hours ago) and read 39123 times:

Quoting ferpe (Reply 165):
Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 164):
Do I understand what you are saying right? The MLG is not done like in the VC10?

The VC10 being a bit older than the B 767.

In total 40 VC10 were built whereof 29 for the captive BOAC in the 1960ies. Furhter it was a very odd ariframe configurtion with double rear engines, way different to the A350. To use that as a reference for what you do 2010 when the schema has been used on every Boeing airliners since the 707 is a little like "yes we drive on the right side of the road as Vietnam does".

As Boeing is doing it since the B 707 it is of course like Boeing, also the VC10 did it like Boeing.

But the rest of your post I do not accept, you always give the honour for a design to the one who did it first, not to who did it most often.


User currently offlinebongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 3584 posts, RR: 3
Reply 167, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 38683 times:

Quoting jvaljean (Reply 134):
If the plane can't be spared for a few hours to stage a "proper" roll-out, then there's something seriously wrong. In the case of the 748i, the plane was out on the "fuel dock" at Everett less than two hours after the conclusion of the roll-out ceremony in the final assembly building. Hopefully this decision merely reflects a change in PR strategy rather than being driven by the demands of the flight-test program.

I think one of the factors is the closeness of Le Bourget, Airbus traditionally make a big splash for their home airshow, some have the theory that big announcements are saved up for that week to make the splash to Tsunami proportions. A lot of effort at Airbus will presently be devoted to Le Bourget, and organising a 350XWB roll out would divert resources, additionally would many of the likely invitees want to make two visits to France in a short period of time ?


User currently offlineA520 From Switzerland, joined Jun 2006, 122 posts, RR: 0
Reply 168, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 38454 times:

Quoting bongodog1964 (Reply 167):
additionally would many of the likely invitees want to make two visits to France in a short period of time ?

... unless they do a roll-out in Toulouse but during Le Bourget ... and organise a free transfer (airport to airport should not be difficult) for the selected happy few who can then see the plane with their own eyes ... before singing the cheque?

just a guess


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 169, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 38470 times:

Quoting EK413 (Reply 158):
Nice comparison of the A350 vs B787

Jon posted another picture:

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7415/8725540643_0e25483003_c.jpg

Larger view here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/flightblogger/8725540643/in/photostream



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlinePygmalion From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 966 posts, RR: 37
Reply 170, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 38201 times:

Has Airbus completed the static testing needed to clear the A350 for flight? I looked for news but couldn't find anything.

Here are some of the milestone tests needed for first flight.

Static testing to at least limit load.

Taxi test to full rotation speeds and subsequent braking.

Fueling tests and calibration of indicating systems.

Full system gauntlet test of all flight critical systems and backups.

Ground vibration tests (needed for flutter clearance)

There are probably others...


User currently offlineVasu From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 3914 posts, RR: 0
Reply 171, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 38146 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 169):

I prefer the Boeing paintjob to the Airbus one  


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 172, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 38132 times:

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 170):
Has Airbus completed the static testing needed to clear the A350 for flight?

Airbus has tested at least all critical components last summer at IABG.

Quoting Vasu (Reply 171):
I prefer the Boeing paintjob to the Airbus one

  



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.
User currently offlineBuyantUkhaa From Mongolia, joined May 2004, 2898 posts, RR: 3
Reply 173, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 38059 times:

By the way, did anyone else notice that the main gear wheels are spaced much further apart (on one axle) than usual on the A350? What would be the reason to do so? This requires a (slightly) bigger gear bay, so would consume valuable space within the fuselage.


I scratch my head, therefore I am.
User currently offlineairbazar From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 8362 posts, RR: 10
Reply 174, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 38102 times:

The most striking difference to me is how much cleaner the 787 wing is. The A350 has enourmous "canoes" compared to the 787 wing.

Quoting BuyantUkhaa (Reply 173):
By the way, did anyone else notice that the main gear wheels are spaced much further apart (on one axle) than usual on the A350? What would be the reason to do so? This requires a (slightly) bigger gear bay, so would consume valuable space within the fuselage.

I noticed that too. My guess is bigger wheels for a future HGW variant or maybe the A350-1000?


User currently offlinetortugamon From United States of America, joined Apr 2013, 3446 posts, RR: 10
Reply 175, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 37835 times:

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 155):
Sure, unless one need those 20 extra seats (77E can seat 314 pax in a 10 abreast Y layout).

-Other than AF it is hard to find a 77E with 10 abreast seating. EK has 6. If airlines are trying to replace this highest produced 777 variant (for a couple more weeks anyway) for existing capacity then the 787-9 is a good fit, if they want growth and some additional range than the A350-900 is a perfect choice. Maybe that is why we see the 787s going to KL and the A350s potentially going to AF.

tortugamon


User currently offlineKarelXWB From Netherlands, joined Jul 2012, 11639 posts, RR: 33
Reply 176, posted (1 year 4 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 37824 times:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 175):
Maybe that is why we see the 787s going to KL and the A350s potentially going to AF.

Both airlines will operate both types, there must be another reason.



Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe.