DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:06 am

Here's my thoughts in a nut-shell-

The A350: to late to fight the 772ER, to soon to replace it

Looking at the 2010 EOS of the A350, it cannot be seen as a long-term product for Airbus. We mostly agree that the A350 takes on the high-end of the 7E7-9 and low-end of the 772ER rather than acting as a 767 replacement. But is now the right time to take on the 777? I believe the answer is no.

The majority of 772ER will be no more than 10-15 years old in 2010, and will be far too young for replacement in bulk. The need for a true 777 replacement won't come until 2015-2020, and at this time, the A350 will be older than 5 years. Boeing will be able to tailor their 777NG/Replacement after observing the A350 for several years and arguably place the superior aircraft on the market.

Will Airbus be forced to update the A350 again to match an improved 777? I can't see the A350 being a viable product... it arrives "between the waves" of aircraft purchase and would only benefit from add-on orders from A330/A340 customers (NW, LH, QF) and a few new customers (EK, QR).

But pass the 300 mark and cut into Boeing... not likely IMO
 
minmiester
Posts: 71
Joined: Tue May 01, 2001 2:20 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:14 am

"The majority of 772ER will be no more than 10-15 years old in 2010, and will be far too young for replacement in bulk."

Not necessarily the case. SQ have shown that airlines may be more than prepared to replace a young aircraft if there is an obviously superior product on the market, and any airline CEO would have his/her shareholders to answer to if he/she didn't find and implement the most cost-effective way to increase shareholder return. IF (if being the operative word) the A350 appears and shows SIGNIFICANT cost advantages over a 772ER, then 772ERs might just start disappearing very quickly.

Cheers

Min
 
Superfly
Posts: 37735
Joined: Thu May 11, 2000 8:01 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:22 am

Horrible timing for Airbus or Boeing?
Bring back the Concorde
 
DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:26 am

SQ have shown that airlines may be more than prepared to replace a young aircraft if there is an obviously superior product on the market,

Is SQ representitive of most airlines? The answer is no... most airlines will hold onto the 772ER for a long time. The DC-10s/L1011's served until 1998 in North America.... the vast majority of the world (including Europe and parts of Asia) do not maintain 6 year-old fleets.
 
Areopagus
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 12:31 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 9:54 am

Why would Boeing build an all-new replacement for the 772ER? Since the 7E7 fuselage cross section is bigger than the 330/340/350, it ought to be as stretchable.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:10 am

Well, given the fact that the idea behind A350 is to compete with 7E7, I wouldn't put it in the same league as 777. Any A350 vs 772 comparison is just Leahy's marketing agenda to lure customers away from purchasing 772 until Airbus has the true A343 replacement ready. Airbus is taking "slightly bigger is better" approach, which imo is smart, when we take passenger-per-mile fuel cost into account. What would not work is "hang 7E7 engines on A330" approach - I have a feeling Airbus will redesign A330s internal systems and make the aircraft "all electrical" using bleedless engines. In addition to the use of GLARE and AWIATOR technology, it might be a viable competitor to 7E7.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:37 am

I think it's pretty good timing. If they mangage to keep the aircraft similar to the A330 commonality wise generally in spares, they've already got a huge pool of A330 customers to work with. They wont get em all but it'll help.

I also think Airbus have sized the plane better.

However much will depend on those good old performance specs, which we are yet to see and are a long way off getting confirmed after EIS.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:40 am

talk is cheap..until I see the finished goods, there is no credibility on either side....

that being said, Airbus is almost done with the BumbleBee 380, so I give them credit, now lets see if they achieve their goals..if they can, then kudos to them...they will have upped the product which was dominated by Boeing for decades..


the 7E7 development is moving along nicely, they have done extensive testing on it and hopefully will have a workable flying prototype soon.....


the A350 is NOTHING until there are working models and more information....the producer of a product must be able to PROVE they indeed have the superiour product, not just releasing a bunch of press releases stating "our product is better than theirs"......
"Up the Irons!"
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:46 am

the A350 is NOTHING until there are working models and more information....the producer of a product must be able to PROVE they indeed have the superiour product, not just releasing a bunch of press releases stating "our product is better than theirs"......

...which is exactly what Boeing was doing with 7E7 about a month after they decided to shelve the Sonic Cruiser project. Remember that??
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
StickShaker
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:34 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:48 am

The A350 has been conceived from a need for Airbus to respond quickly to the 7e7 and hence its timing is predicated on the 7e7 launch and EIS. The 350-900 will provide an effective competitor to the 772 but the 350 program in general was not conceived for that purpose.

Boeing do not have the resources, capital or time to replace the 777 until well after 7e7 EIS and probably 737NG EIS. So yes the timing may not appear to be ideal to be going after the 772 but is it that simple to identify the ideal time when a program should be launched.
The 7e7 itself has not been launched at an ideal time with many potential customers in very poor financial health but Boeing wants to get the program and the technology in place as soon as possible.
Its not easy to predict exactly what health or shape the aircraft industry will be in 10 years into the future.

This is not an industry that rewards those who choose to procrastinate or sit around and do nothing - Boeing themselves slipped from number 1 to number 2 spot for precisely those reasons.
The rewards tend to come to those who innovate and are prepared to take a calculated risk.

Cheers,
StickShaker


 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:50 am

BlueSky1976..I wasnt an a.net member then, otherwise, I would have possibly said the same thing regarding Boeing...fair is fair......  Big grin
"Up the Irons!"
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:54 am

The A350 will most definetly maintain the current customer base as well as create new one. Is this timed right? Yeah, I think so... Boeing is losing the PR war... first announced 200 order by year end... and now - its not going to happen. So A350 is being timed well...

The A350 is a 7E9 as well as 772 competitor... look at the specs... come on folks... If the A350 is proven a success and their number add up.. you will see a new variants...

Also, for all those who really believe that this world is based on pure competition is not reading the news beyond Fox... world politics plays a huge role in decision making... A good part of Boeing's rash of bad luck coming up with new orders is due to our current administration.

So until we change our attitudes, the world will continue to prefer anything other than American... simple as that...
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
DfwRevolution
Topic Author
Posts: 8572
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:01 am

The A350 is a 7E9 as well as 772 competitor... look at the specs... come on folks... If the A350 is proven a success and their number add up.. you will see a new variants...

Bingo-

A350-800 equals 7E7-9
A350-900 equals 772ER

Interesting to note that Airbus mentions the smaller 7E7-8 as the primary competitor to the A350-800, leading me to believe the -9 will blow the A350-800 away in seat/mile cost.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 12:09 pm

Well, that's not necessarily the wrong idea.

Just like the A350-900 will also do a number on the 7E7-9's seat/mile cost, if Airbus does everything correctly.

The A350-800 is larger than the 7E7-8, but it is still going to be smaller than the 7E7-9 by several feet.

N
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:28 pm

BlueSky said it all...

Airbus is taking "slightly bigger is better" approach, which imo is smart, when we take passenger-per-mile fuel cost into account.

In addition to the use of GLARE and AWIATOR technology, it might be a viable competitor to 7E7.

The only way airbus can compete with the 7E7 using a modified A330 is to do exactly what BlueSky said: more seats + incorporate new technologies.

Perhaps the seat/mile costs could go as low as the 7E7 if the airlines can fill in all the extra seats... which then the A350 would probably not be operating on the same market as the smaller 7e7...

...but in the end, Airbus is taking a more traditional/safer approach... hub-hub, instead of the boeing point to point approach.

No doubt these are very interesting times...

PPVRA

[Edited 2004-12-10 05:31:46]
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Lockheed1011
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 4:04 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:33 pm

A350 = Horrible Timing

I think so. Instead of concentrating all the energy and new ideas into the A380 first and then go to the next step.
My mother always said to me, "Do not try to jump the river until you get to it!"
 
m404
Posts: 1875
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:43 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:38 pm

After listening to the opposing cases by each manufacturer for their 7E7 and AB380 products as for range and size I'd have to say the timing of the 350 is perfect for a 7E7 spoiler. It MAY be able to leverage from carriers already flying the 340/330 family and even the 320 series but most importantly if they show similar performance for less money from the shorter R&D work needed it will deter orders for the 7E7. It may be a giant killer. My own feelings is that is precisely what it's meant for.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 1:39 pm

Or it could be a giant dose of Leahy.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 2:28 pm

"350 is perfect for a 7E7 spoiler." - so, combining two similar topics, 350 is a threat to 7E7-9 and 777-200ER. Whom do we have in between? Exactly: 330 and, not far from that, 340NG. I'd agree, a "giant killer" 350 is going to be...

It was already discussed that 380 would look way more attractive being 450-seater base and 550+ stretch. Then it would cover everything from potential 747Adv and above - while now it is definitely going to be a success in the very upper niche but leaves even bigger 400 to 500 niche to (if built) 747Adv. Same looks with 350: competes with "upper" 7E7 and "lower" 777, in the same time "perfectly spoiling" 330/340, while leaving 757/767/300/310 totally unattended... Don't know about wrong timing, but the targeted market?

(BTW, guys, our "new and improved" spell checker is totally ignorant about aircraft types...)
 
sebring
Posts: 1320
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 12:08 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 3:10 pm

Well, if you are an airline like Air Canada flying over 65 widebody aircraft, from 762 to 345s, the timing is great. Nothing like having two aircraft manufacturers competing for a multi-billlion-dollar fleet renewal and expansion program AC is contemplating for the end of the decade. Airbus has shown that it can overcome any inadequacies in design or performance with very aggressive pricing. AC's two 345s cost $87 million apiece, which is the same AC paid for its 343s several years ago, and with the appreciation of the Canadian dollar, those 345s actually cost less in C$ terms. That's about the price Boeing is probably flogging a 200-seat 7E7, and not necessarily the long-range variants. It's maybe two-thirds of what AC would have paid for 777s, and maybe half. AC's president noted in a new book he just published that Boeing can be obstinate and unbending as a supplier. Milton's mentor, Hollis Harris, switched to the Airbus widebody because Boeing wouldn't delay delivery of six 767-300s AC had ordered just before the onset of tough economic times. While I wouldn't dismiss Boeing chances of getting AC's big order, I think AC is thrilled to have Airbus in the room to create a real competition.

In fact, I believe most airlines feel the same way.


 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 3:54 pm

AC's two 345s cost $87 million apiece, which is the same AC paid for its 343s several years ago, and with the appreciation of the Canadian dollar, those 345s actually cost less in C$ terms

But that was probably when the US$ was near its peak in relation to the Euro and the european national currencies, which allowed Airbus to price aggressively. If Airbus were to bring the same revenue in Euros in, the price would be closer to $110 million today.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
m404
Posts: 1875
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 4:43 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 4:05 pm

The giant killer I was refering to was Boeing. If AB can kill the 7E7 at the right time just after production is started it would extend Boeing so far that the 747 might, without newer models to undercut the 380, leave it totally dependent on the NG series.
Less sarcasm and more thought equal better understanding
 
RT514
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 2:11 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:53 pm

Horrible timing for Airbus or Boeing?

An excellent question, Superfly.
Approval and launch of the A350 is bad timing -- for Boeing.
Until news of the A350, Boeing was going to be developing their first new aircraft in over a decade, one without a directly competitive product. That advantage now goes down the crapper, while Airbus continues ahead with what will be the world's largest airliner, an airliner with no direct competitor.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Fri Dec 10, 2004 11:56 pm

RT514:

The idea that the A350 can compete with the 7E7 is just speculation. We know that they can't achieve complete parity with high aluminum content and bleed-air engines. Airbus will be happy to stop the bleeding, let alone kill the 7E7 in sales.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
RT514
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 2:11 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 12:14 am

N328KF:

The idea that the A350 can compete with the 7E7 is just speculation.

Absolutely. Once they're closer to taking flight, it will be interesting to see the specs of both aircraft.

Also, I'm not necessarily predicting that the A350 will be a huge success. It just would have been better for Boeing had the 7E7 been able to go without direct competition, as the 747 was for over thirty years.

Ahhh, the beauty of competition.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13366
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 12:20 am

We know that they can't achieve complete parity with high aluminum content and bleed-air engines.

The economy of the new GE and RR engines is not dependent on their being bleedless (they say this themselves - make sense because they want to sell bled versions as well!), so bled versions are unlikely to be very different in fuel-burn.

By making the A350 a bit bigger than the corresponding 7E7 versions, Airbus competes (and they say wins) on operating costs and fuel burn/seat.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 12:33 am

The biggest competitive advantage Airbus has is politics and underpricing... you will see both in action and the A350 will sell very well.

Most airlines don't care for performance numbers... They evaluate the purchase price as well as political ramifications.

There is a reason why the A340 is somewhat of a success... and its not because of Performance.
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
A319114
Posts: 520
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 9:40 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 12:58 am

The biggest competitive advantage Airbus has is politics and underpricing... you will see both in action and the A350 will sell very well.

Most airlines don't care for performance numbers... They evaluate the purchase price as well as political ramifications.

There is a reason why the A340 is somewhat of a success... and its not because of P


This is ridiculous. You seriously think that airlines don't care for performance numbers?! Airlines have to make profits, and nothing is more important than performance numbers. Also, do you really think that PRIVATE owned airlines care about politics when buying aircraft?

And if Airbus' aircraft are overpriced, then how do you explain their profit? subsidies? yeah right....
Destruction leads to a very rough road but it also breeds creation
 
cumulonimbus
Posts: 508
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 8:13 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:05 am


Honestly I do not think it is bad timing on Airbus' behalf. You Know it is now or never, if they wait any longer they could lose some potentiel orders. Remember an Order for boeing is an order taken away from Airbus. That last line was for all the little Kiddies who think Airlines have an endless supply of Money.

Mike
 
RIX
Posts: 1589
Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:14 am

"It just would have been better for Boeing had the 7E7 been able to go without direct competition, as the 747 was for over thirty years."... "By making the A350 a bit bigger than the corresponding 7E7 versions, Airbus competes (and they say wins) on operating costs and fuel burn/seat. - but being "slightly bigger", 350 is not a direct competitor to 7E7, leaving the latter still mostly without competition. Same for 747: 380 is not its competitor, it is being ordered for 500+ market. Correct me if I'm wrong, but we are still to see 380 actually replacing 747 (not because of growing seats demand on a given route but because its "operating costs and fuel burn/seat" are better while carrying same amount of passengers as 747 - I mean, show me anybody who buys 380 to fly it just with 416 passengers, not expecting any growth).
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 1:15 am

>>This is ridiculous. You seriously think that airlines don't care for performance >>numbers?! Airlines have to make profits, and nothing is more important than >>performance numbers. Also, do you really think that PRIVATE owned airlines >>care about politics when buying aircraft?

Most airlines are owned or partly owned by their governments. Private airlines want performance just as much as they want a great price for their planes... it goes hand in hand.... but you can have a higer performing jet but with a higer price and airlines have chose the lower price... see it all the time with the A340 Vs. 777... so now the same may be for the 350 Vs 7E7.

>>And if Airbus' aircraft are overpriced, then how do you explain their profit? >>subsidies? yeah right....

your right, subsidies does have a play and we can debate whether its huge or not... but you are going to have to agree with me, that Airbus is better managed, and marketing. They also build airplanes at a lower cost where they can underprice Boeing.

But if you look closely at almost at every category Boeing has the most efficient jets. Hence the reason why the A350 will be a sucess...
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 3:07 am

dont forget, Boeing is trying very hard to trim the "fat" off from their manufacturing, and they are exporting some R&D and manufacturing, if they can even cut 5%-7% off from the bottom line expenses, then Boeing will be very price comptetive also......



"Up the Irons!"
 
Ken777
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:46 am

A will have an advantage from existing 330 customers and I anticipate a lot of orders from this.

B will have an advantage from more advanced technology in the 7E7 - no matter how "much more advanced" it is.

Since neither company is against sticking one up the competition I see B lamenting on how "little technological advances" A is putting into the 350.

Another potential advantage for B is the fact that they will have done a lot of the work necessary to move the "E" to the 737 line, especially if Southwest comes in with a major launch order - which would not surprise me if it happened in 12 - 24 months. My bet (of a dollar or less) is that they have already discussed this a rather extensively.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:26 am

The entry for service date for the A350 is in 2010. This is quite far off, so it allows Airbus to sell more A330s. But it gives Boeing more time to assess threats to the 777 program to make it more competitive, or look into a 7E7 derivative.

Does anyone have an opinion why the range drop off for the 7E7-9 from the 7E7-8 is low, while the drop off for the A350-900 from the -800 is much much greater?
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
MD80Nut
Posts: 972
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 6:43 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:47 am

I don't think Airbus' timing with the A350 is all that bad. The market for twin engine long range aircraft has been growing steadily, and it's probably going to continue to increase. The A350's commonality with the A330/A340 will make it very attractive to operators of these two types. Plus there will be many airlines hanging on to their 767s until 2010 and beyond, the A350 will be coming on in time to be considered to replace them.

Anyway, I think it's way too early to tell for sure how well the A350 will do in the market, after all, it won't be available until 2010 and a lot can happen between now and then.

Cheers, Ralph
Fly Douglas Jets DC-8 / DC-9 / DC-10 / MD80 / MD11 / MD90 / 717
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:49 am

Odd that it will take Airbus five years of development time to offer a warmed over product, whereas Boeing is offering an all-new one in four years.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
rlwynn
Posts: 1105
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2000 3:35 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:51 am

The replacement for the 777 will fly around 2020 and be a full composite plane.
Just as the 737 replacement will be.
I can drive faster than you
 
User avatar
solnabo
Posts: 5015
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:53 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 5:55 am

What will happend to 747Adv, IF there ever be building those?

I mean...take SQ for ex: They ordered a lot of 773ER and a lot of 388! Are SQ going to need anything between?? Yes, the A350 or 7E7! Major carriers (I guess) is/or going to do the same, so where does 747Adv. fit in?

The only place I can see 747 is among the cargo-carriers.

My 0,02

Micke//SE Big grin
Airbus SAS - Love them both
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:03 am

Solnabo:

Yes, we know what you see.



The 747A theoretically has a replacement with existing 747-400 operators, and there's a gap between the A346/773ER and A388.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
PPVRA
Posts: 7878
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:48 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:17 am

What will happened to 747Adv, IF there ever be building those?

I think Boeing is going to have to come up with a clean sheet design for the 747 replacement...

On the topic,

I actually would say the timing is great. The A350 will supplement the 7E7... I think we could see A350-900 (don't see a bright future for the -800 though...) operating side by side with 7E7s...

Now if Boeing comes out with a long range 7E7-3... that would bring in big problems for Airbus in the long run...

Watch out 772ER and A342 & 3...

PPVRA
"If goods do not cross borders, soldiers will" - Frederic Bastiat
 
Planesmart
Posts: 1735
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:09 am

Lease terms/ownership periods have diverged in recent years, with financially sound airlines tending to lease/own for shorter periods, and less financial airlines holding for longer.

Part of the reason for less financial airlines leasing / owning longer, is each transaction requires credit approval by the leasing co/ financiers.

If your financial position / outlook is average or worse, it may be harder to replace a/c in 5yrs, so they will try to go for longest lease/finance period possible. Other than payment default or other specified trigger events, they know the aircraft will remain in service with them.

No different to what we see in the truck, bus and car industry.

The other element is the sales philosophy of A & B.

B sees the sale of a model as a long-term committment by an airline. This is appropriate for loyal (we only use B) & financially constrained operators.

Because of greater flight deck commonality, A can afford to be more aggressive selling A models against A models, as well as against B.

A are far more proactive in their contact/sales programmes with smaller airlines that will not buy new aircraft for many years, if ever.

Motivation is to sell new a/c and increase worldwide A base. For example, they will package a proposal to airline X for 5x A343, inc spares, training, finance. Then they will approach the A343 operator who say only currently operates 3 and have 2 on order. Take delivery of the 2 on order next yr, replace with A350 in 2010, and sell the A343 for $Z (based on hours, cycles & condition). Sign here.

A350 isn't bad timing for A or their sales team. It's a trigger event to sell financially sound airlines new aircraft, and deploy replaced aircraft with existing and new used A customers.
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 525
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:10 am

"Odd that it will take Airbus five years of development time to offer a warmed over product, whereas Boeing is offering an all-new one in four years."

Thats because Airbus will certify 388,A400 and 358,359 between 2006 and 2010,
As oppose to just 7e7-8, 7e7-9 for Boeing.

 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:17 am

AirbusCanada:

By that token, Boeing has the 777-200LR, 7E7-3, 7E7-8, 7E7-9, V-22 (since you included A400M, and both need to be able to fly in civil airspace) to certify.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
RedDragon
Posts: 1096
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:24 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 7:27 am

Now if Boeing comes out with a long range 7E7-3... that would bring in big problems for Airbus in the long run...

Um... am I missing something about the 7E8 that doesn't fit this bill?
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 525
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 8:25 am

By that token, Boeing has the 777-200LR, 7E7-3, 7E7-8, 7E7-9, V-22 (since you included A400M, and both need to be able to fly in civil airspace) to certify.



True, but 772LR is a variant as oppose to a brand new development.
And for the V-22, it's not a fixed wing aircraft and it's not part of Boeing Commerical aircrafts, just like EADS rotary wing helicopers are not part of Airbus. But the A400 will be developed directly by Airbus Engineers.
But I did miss the 7e7-3, thnx for correcting me.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 9:44 am

AirbusCanada:

A400M is not from Airbus' civil division either, if you're going to note that the V-22 is not a BCA product.

In any event, sure, the 777-200LR is just a derivative of an existing product. Just like the A350-900 is a variant of the A350-800, and the 7E7-9 is a variant of the 7E7-8 and 7E7-3. You're talking in circles here, dude.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 525
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:06 am


In any event, sure, the 777-200LR is just a derivative of an existing product. Just like the A350-900 is a variant of the A350-800, and the 7E7-9 is a variant of the 7E7-8 and 7E7-3. You're talking in circles here, dude.

Dude the 7e7, 380 and A400 and 350 are all new planes. as oppose to the 777-200LR.
and how many 777 engineers are working on the V-22?
the engineers working on the A400 programs were takes form 340/380 programs. the A400 even shares systems and cockpit commonality with the rest of the airbus family. here is a pic for you
http://www.airbusmilitary.com/gallery/a400mcockpit1024.jpg
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:11 am

AirbusCanada:

The A350-800/900 is not all-new. It's a derivative of the A330/A340. Don't bother arguing that. It's true. Just like the 777-200LR is a derivative of existing 777s. So why are you trying to differentiate between the examples? In any event, ALL of the aircraft mentioned still need FAA/JAA certification. You're comparing apples to apples and trying to get orange juice.

The A400M program contains a lot of EADS and Alenia engineers from the military side. It can only have so much commonality. And for that matter, the V-22 has some commonality with the BA609. So what? It's still a military program.

Both of those paragraphs are cases where you are failing to properly ascertain the relationship with existing models.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:15 am

So why is the GE engine going to be the only engine offered for the A350 initially? Does this have anything to do with the fact that GE hasn't received 7E7 orders yet and the fact that ANA went for the Trent for political reasons. Is there more to that deal than Japan trying to complicate a trade dispute with the EU? Did they get an RR commitment to not work with the A350 program for several years?

Is this going to damage prospects for A350 in airlines favoring RR engines?

Also what is going to happen with airlines that have preferred PW engines? They don't have an aircraft choice yet.

ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: A350 = Horrible Timing

Sat Dec 11, 2004 10:19 am

Atmx2000:

There are a variety of possible reasons. Here are some, and they are just guesses.

1) GE has more free resources to devote to the project right now. Maybe they have extra engineering staff sitting around, or R-R are sitting around.
2) Perhaps it has to do with anticipated first customers. Whether they're GE fans or, perhaps, just French (eg. AF)
3) Perhaps GE anticipated an Airbus response, and already had an appropriate engine ready.

To me, this seems like an excellent way for Pratt & Whitney to try to get back in the game.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt