DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:16 am

According to this article, the A-350 has been totally redone and will only retain 10% of the parts of the A-330. This statement is near the end of the article:

http://money.iwon.com/jsp/nw/nwdt_rt...eed=dji&date=20050608&cat=INDUSTRY

The A350 that's being offered to airlines now will be a virtually all-new aircraft, and only about 10% of the A330's components will be retained. Cockpit commonality with other members of the Airbus wide-body range will ensure that training costs will be minimized.

Airbus reckons that the break-even point for the A350 is somewhere between 400 and 500 aircraft. But industry analysts said that probably the main reason behind the EADS statement Wednesday is to clear the air going into next week's air show.


[Edited 2005-06-08 23:16:53]
One Nation Under God
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8549
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:22 am

Quoting DAYflyer (Thread starter):
Cockpit commonality with other members of the Airbus wide-body range will ensure that training costs will be minimized.

At this point, they are at no more advantage than Boeing with 777 to 787 conversion time.

Quoting DAYflyer (Thread starter):
The A350 that's being offered to airlines now will be a virtually all-new aircraft, and only about 10% of the A330's components will be retained.

And yet only $5 billion dollars? Talk about pinching pennies to 90% of a widebody airplane of this magnitude. The 787 is tipping the scale at $8 billion plus additional RD...
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:25 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
And yet only $5 billion dollars? Talk about pinching pennies to 90% of a widebody airplane of this magnitude. The 787 is tipping the scale at $8 billion plus additional RD...

Interesting observation. I wonder if it includes the $3.5 B they are seeking for launch aid.

I wonder if the 787 is more expensive as a result of more composites and other new technologies, possible because of GLARE being cheaper??
One Nation Under God
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:33 am

or more expensive because it is real and not a morphing product right now.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 4767
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:42 am

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
I wonder if it includes the $3.5 B they are seeking for launch aid.

Where did you get that number? They're looking for $1.5 - $2 billion, as in a third of the total cost, not $3.5. And this is included in the $ 5 billion.
 
keesje
Posts: 8610
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 6:52 am

1 part probably is the airframe
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
trex8
Posts: 4578
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 7:22 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
or more expensive because it is real and not a morphing product right now.

the 787 is a totally new design, every part is designed from scratch , the A350 in whatever guise it eventually ends up as could still use the basic design of the A330 for many structures, even if the parts are made of different materials and have some minor changes in dimension, they are not having to reinvent everything from zero. it may well be that only 10% of parts is interchangeable with a A330 but that does;'t mean 90% of the drawings are totally different or need new production jigs etc, that saves you lots of $$$!
 
avek00
Posts: 3156
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 8:06 am

All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...
Live life to the fullest.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 2:43 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):

At this point, they are at no more advantage than Boeing with 777 to 787 conversion time.



Quoting Avek00 (Reply 7):
All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...

The A350 would still have a small advantage in spare parts commonality.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):

And yet only $5 billion dollars? Talk about pinching pennies to 90% of a widebody airplane of this magnitude. The 787 is tipping the scale at $8 billion plus additional RD...

I haven't heard of any new technologies being developed for the A350. The B787, on the other hand, is pioneering two major advances in aviation technology (composite fuselage and bleedless systems). One would expect the B787 to have significantly higher R&D costs than the A350. The payoff for Boeing is that the B787 should be significantly less expensive to manufacture and to operate.
 
glacote
Posts: 357
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2005 1:44 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Thu Jun 09, 2005 10:32 pm

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 7):
All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...



Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
The A350 would still have a small advantage in spare parts commonality.

Spare parts and most of all pilot qualification and training. Please.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 7984
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:20 am

In that case, the cost of R&D for the A350 will now officially zoom through the roof. I wouldn't be surprised that the A350 development costs reach the €7-€8 billion range, and EADS shareholders won't stand for that!  no 
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:23 am

Quoting Scorpio (Reply 4):
Where did you get that number? They're looking for $1.5 - $2 billion, as in a third of the total cost, not $3.5. And this is included in the $ 5 billion.

Thank you, that was a typo. I hit the 3 instead of the 1. I am aware of the correct figure. Sorry about that!
One Nation Under God
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:27 am

Quoting Trex8 (Reply 6):
the 787 is a totally new design, every part is designed from scratch , the A350 in whatever guise it eventually ends up as could still use the basic design of the A330 for many structures, even if the parts are made of different materials and have some minor changes in dimension, they are not having to reinvent everything from zero. it may well be that only 10% of parts is interchangeable with a A330 but that does;'t mean 90% of the drawings are totally different or need new production jigs etc, that saves you lots of $$$!



Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
I haven't heard of any new technologies being developed for the A350. The B787, on the other hand, is pioneering two major advances in aviation technology (composite fuselage and bleedless systems). One would expect the B787 to have significantly higher R&D costs than the A350. The payoff for Boeing is that the B787 should be significantly less expensive to manufacture and to operate.

Thank you for those excellent perspectives on the savings of the aircraft development costs.
One Nation Under God
 
keesje
Posts: 8610
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:41 am

Does a slightly improved component (LDG, APU) with a different part/ dash number count as a new part?

If so the book on "lying with statistics" has a new chapter.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
planefreakaa
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2005 4:26 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:44 am

how can airbus develope 2 aircraft at the same time......oooohhh yea, government loans/gifts.
im an idiot, i forgot about those things...
 
Glom
Posts: 2051
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 2:38 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:53 am

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 14):
how can airbus develope 2 aircraft at the same time......oooohhh yea, government loans/gifts.
im an idiot, i forgot about those things...

Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:54 am

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 14):
how can airbus develope 2 aircraft at the same time......oooohhh yea, government loans/gifts.
im an idiot, i forgot about those things...

Yes you are. What 2 aircraft are currently being developed?

Do you forget Boeing developing the 747-400, 767, 757, and 737-300 all at the same time?

N
 
SNATH
Posts: 3049
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 5:23 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 12:55 am

Quoting Glom (Reply 15):
Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.

Didn't they also develop the B757 and B767 at the same time too?

Tony
Nikon: we don't want more pixels, we want better pixels.
 
DAYflyer
Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:55 am

Quoting Glom (Reply 15):
Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.

Yes, and they also almost bankrupted themselves in the process. 3 distinct programs at the same time is a substantial drain.
One Nation Under God
 
airbazar
Posts: 6809
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:22 am

Holy cow, this surely must be a new record. It took only one post to turn a thread about the A350 into a thread about the 787.
 
GQfluffy
Posts: 3072
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 1:25 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:26 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 8):
The A350 would still have a small advantage in spare parts commonality.

Like what??? Lav seats and reading light bulbs???

fluffy
This isn't where I parked my car...
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13730
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:38 am

Quoting Glacote (Reply 9):
Spare parts and most of all pilot qualification and training. Please.

787 is supposed to be similar to 777 for pilots, no?

Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 20):
Like what??? Lav seats and reading light bulbs???

interior fixtures don't count, do they?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 4:45 am

Quoting Glom (Reply 15):
Well, Boeing developed the 727, 737 and 747 at the same time.



Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
Do you forget Boeing developing the 747-400, 767, 757, and 737-300 all at the same time?

Let's get the timing right on these programs.

727 EIS: 1965
731 EIS: 1968
741 EIS: 1970
762 EIS: 1982
752 EIS: 1983
733 EIS: 1985
744 EIS: 1989

There was a slight overlap between the 731 and the 741, but the only two Boeing models that were really developed concurrently were the 762 and 752. Timing on the other programs allowed shifting of the design resources so competition for those resources was kept to a minimum.

Airbus has the same opportunity on the A388 and A358 since engineers needed for initial design work on the A358 probably will not be needed on the A388 now unless testing identifies need for major changes.

Money might still be a challenge though.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
N60659
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:15 am

Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 22):
There was a slight overlap between the 731 and the 741, but the only two Boeing models that were really developed concurrently were the 762 and 752.

Well wasn't there a fairly large overlap between the 741 and the B2707, although the latter never saw the light of day.

-N60659
Nec Dextrorsum Nec Sinistrorsum
 
Joost
Posts: 1841
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2005 8:27 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:31 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 13):
If so the book on "lying with statistics" has a new chapter.

Aren't there lies, damn lies and statistics?

Of course it depends on what you define as different or equal. When a component is only slightly changed but not interexchangable with the 330 anymore, it's different. What is mostly says, is that part commonality obviously is less important than perfect-match-for-the-product.
 
B2707SST
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:25 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:43 am

Quoting N60659 (Reply 23):
Well wasn't there a fairly large overlap between the 741 and the B2707, although the latter never saw the light of day.

Yes, there were up to 3,000 engineers working on the B2707 in the mid-to-late 1960s, with activity ramping up after Boeing won the contract at the end of 1966. Prototype construction was underway (15% completion) when the program was axed in April 1971. EIS was originally (1966) scheduled for late 1974 or early 1975, which was pushed back until at least 1978 when Boeing dropped the swing wing for a double-delta.

Boeing anticipated that they would need substantial earnings from the 747 to fund SST tooling-up and production in the early 1970s, which were to be funded by Boeing (90% of R&D was picked up by the government, to be repaid through royalties on sales). The severe market downturn in the early 1970s and problems getting the 747 into service could have resulted in a major cash crisis. Even without massive SST expenditures, Boeing teetered on the brink for a while. Employment at Boeing's Seattle-area facilities went from over 100,000 at its peak in 1967 to a trough of 37,000 in 1971.

--B2707SST

[Edited 2005-06-09 22:45:05]
Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
 
N60659
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2005 3:24 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:53 am

Quoting B2707SST (Reply 25):
Employment at Boeing's Seattle-area facilities went from over 100,000 at its peak in 1967 to a trough of 37,000 in 1971.

Prompting the billboard - "Would the last person leaving Seattle please turn out the lights" or something close to that.

Great summary B2707SST !!!

-N60659
Nec Dextrorsum Nec Sinistrorsum
 
GQfluffy
Posts: 3072
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 1:25 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 6:27 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
Quoting GQfluffy (Reply 20):
Like what??? Lav seats and reading light bulbs???

interior fixtures don't count, do they?

Guess you didn't see the sarcasm dripping off your screen. No, I don't think interiors count...

fluffy
This isn't where I parked my car...
 
B2707SST
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:25 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:15 am

Quoting N60659 (Reply 26):
Prompting the billboard - "Would the last person leaving Seattle please turn out the lights" or something close to that.

Yep, 1971 was not a good time in Seattle. In fact, the city even draped an anti-suicide net below the Space Needle.






SST employees get their layoff notices (mockup in background)




2707 mockup being hauled away


Seattle Times article



--B2707SST
Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3185
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 7:44 am

Quoting N60659 (Reply 23):
Well wasn't there a fairly large overlap between the 741 and the B2707, although the latter never saw the light of day.

Agreed, as well documented by B2707SST.

However, there were two big differences:

1) Most of the SST R&D money was being provided by the FAA, also described by B2707SST.

2) The Aero Engineer talent pool was much deeper in those days, given 30 years of the Military-Industrial complex (WW2 and the Cold War) running at full throttle. Today, even if the money was available to run two simultaneous programs, it would be hard to find the right kind of engineers.
Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
 
avek00
Posts: 3156
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:56 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 8:02 am

Quoting Glacote (Reply 9):
Spare parts and most of all pilot qualification and training.

Probably wrong on both counts:

1. The 350 will likely have greater spare parts commonality with the 787 or even 777 when all is said and done.

2. The difference in training time and expense has proven to be minimal when jumping between 764 and 777 vs. 320 and 330/340 - I fully expect Boeing to maintain or narrow this difference.
Live life to the fullest.
 
monteycarlos
Posts: 2018
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 5:16 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 11:32 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
At this point, they are at no more advantage than Boeing with 777 to 787 conversion time.

Well its only the case for the 777 and 787, and the 764 to 777... Airbus has it across almost all types.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 1):
And yet only $5 billion dollars? Talk about pinching pennies to 90% of a widebody airplane of this magnitude. The 787 is tipping the scale at $8 billion plus additional RD...

The costs are not finalised in any case. Don't be surprised if it does turn out to be quite large for the A350 (and perhaps the 787 - if there are some weight issues).

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 7):
All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...

Hang on what do you mean. You may not see the benefit of commonality but for an airline who has to pay those costs on a high scale (such as EK whom will probably need to train 300+ aircrew) the savings you make of commonality training are quite high.

Quoting Planefreakaa (Reply 14):
how can airbus develope 2 aircraft at the same time......oooohhh yea, government loans/gifts.
im an idiot, i forgot about those things...

Yes you are. And what two aircraft are being "developed" at the same time might I ask?

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 30):
1. The 350 will likely have greater spare parts commonality with the 787 or even 777 when all is said and done.

Yeah, depending on how common the engines are and other asscociated systems. Its a good point and I think it works the other way as well, and in that case Boeing may be happy that the A350 is using those engines because it may just make their aircraft slightly cheaper.

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 30):
2. The difference in training time and expense has proven to be minimal when jumping between 764 and 777 vs. 320 and 330/340 - I fully expect Boeing to maintain or narrow this difference.

I take issue with this for one reason. How many airlines operate the 764? Ok fair enough for CO this might be good, but the advantage is lost on every other airline, whereas with Airbus it is not because the cockpit is common across ever family excluding the A300/310.
It's a beautiful night to fly like a phoenix...
 
zeekiel
Posts: 398
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:59 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 1:28 pm

10% of parts. Interesting.

So if the A330 hypothetically had 1000 parts the A350 would inherit 100 parts if my maths hasn't exploded in my brain. Of course I would expect the A330 to be more than a toy plane  Smile.

R&D may find some of the A330 parts to be still incredibly useful even though the 787 might be going for a revolutionary new design. Recycling parts would save time and cash on the R&D. It might help or will help integration into already established A330 fleets.

Quoting Avek00 (Reply 7):
All I have to say is A330 commonality my ass - any a.netter who now tries to raise that shall be ruthlessly ridiculed going forward...

Settle down. I would like to raise that issue going forward to see your reaction  Silly.

Cheers

Zeekiel
Bring back the New Zealand Air Combat Force
 
AirbusCanada
Posts: 524
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 5:14 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:02 pm

Boeing anticipated that they would need substantial earnings from the 747 to fund SST tooling-up and production in the early 1970s, which were to be funded by Boeing (90% of R&D was picked up by the government, to be repaid through royalties on sales). The severe market downturn in the early 1970s and problems getting the 747 into service could have resulted in a major cash crisis. Even without massive SST expenditures, Boeing teetered on the brink for a while. Employment at Boeing's Seattle-area facilities went from over 100,000 at its peak in 1967 to a trough of 37,000 in 1971.


Many experts claimed that cancellation of the SST program saved Boeing form bankruptcy. As noted, 90% of the R&D were funded by the government and after the cancellation, the govt had to pay large amount penalty to Boeing for cancelling the program, money desperately needed by Boeing to complete the 747. Around 1971 or so, Boeing closed down large number of washrooms/bathrooms/restrooms in its plants to save on cleaning costs.
 
trevd
Posts: 332
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2004 1:51 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 2:24 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
Do you forget Boeing developing the 747-400, 767, 757, and 737-300 all at the same time?

N

Serious ??
 
bigb
Posts: 722
Joined: Fri Nov 07, 2003 4:30 pm

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:07 pm

Quoting Gigneil (Reply 16):
Do you forget Boeing developing the 747-400, 767, 757, and 737-300 all at the same time?

Most of the 757/767 studies happened thoughout the late 70's because they were slated to be 727-300. Read about UAL and the 727-300. The 737 classics were designed to be stop gaps for a true 727-200 replacement.

767 launched in 1977.
757 launched in 1980.
737-300 launched in 1980.
747-400 launched in 1985.

767 first flight 1981.
757 rolled out 1982.
737-300 First flight 1984.
747-400 first flight 1990.

The only aircrafts that were developed during the same time were the 757/767 which had a lot of work done when they were launched.
ETSN Baber, USN
 
keesje
Posts: 8610
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Fri Jun 10, 2005 5:20 pm

Quoting Joost (Reply 24):
When a component is only slightly changed but not interexchangable with the 330 anymore, it's different. What is mostly says, is that part commonality obviously is less important than perfect-match-for-the-product.

R&D and maintenance cost for a slightly different part are a different story than an all new part...

Nice backgrounds on the SST..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
B2707SST
Posts: 1258
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:25 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Sat Jun 11, 2005 5:17 am

Quoting AirbusCanada (Reply 33):
Many experts claimed that cancellation of the SST program saved Boeing form bankruptcy. As noted, 90% of the R&D were funded by the government and after the cancellation, the govt had to pay large amount penalty to Boeing for cancelling the program, money desperately needed by Boeing to complete the 747. Around 1971 or so, Boeing closed down large number of washrooms/bathrooms/restrooms in its plants to save on cleaning costs.

It is almost certain that Boeing could not have paid for SST production expenses out of pocket during the early 1970s. That said, if the project had gone forward, I expect the government would have picked up production expenses as well, probably in the form of a loan or an additional royalty fee on production aircraft. In any case, I doubt the government would have forced Boeing to declare bankruptcy due to the SST's cash flow needs.

On the other hand, the SST was so far behind schedule, with further slippage likely, that the bulk of production expenses might not have materialized until later in the decade, when the commercial sector had started to recover and Boeing's finances improved somewhat.

The real person saved by the SST's cancellation was the US taxpayer. The oil shocks crippled the market for supersonic aircraft, the airlines experienced massive overcapacity due to a slump in demand and too many 747 orders, and by 1971, the fixed-wing 2707-300's performance had deteriorated so much relative to the original swing-wing design that operating economics went into the toilet. If production had commenced, Boeing probably would have been lucky to sell 50 frames. The taxpayers, of course, would have absorbed multi-billion dollar losses, just as they did in Britain and France.

The US SST would have been a remarkable aircraft, but even I will admit that the price was too great. Cancellation was, unfortunately, the right decision.

--B2707SST
Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
 
trex8
Posts: 4578
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: A-350 To Retain 10% Of 330 Parts

Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:35 am

FWIW I was glancing through that FI article about the A345/6 airline experience from early May and the A345/6 only has 30% parts commonality with the A343.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: 817Dreamliiner, alski, ArtV, ba319-131, CV990A, dn280tls, hinckley, lcycs300, Putnik, rj968, SCQ83, Yahoo [Bot] and 296 guests