NYC777
Topic Author
Posts: 5065
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 7:25 am

Gee when the 787 came out I remember all the derision that Airbus and its supporters heaped on the aircraft. Words like "Chinese Copy" or "Dreaming in Seattle" turned out to be Airbus' biggest nightmare.

I wonder what other mistakes they've made (something that also has an "8" in it).

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060513.../franceaviationairbus_060513185041

Despite the revamping the "all new" A350 will probably still be heavier than the 787 IMO.
That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
david31998
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 4:49 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 7:48 am

The earlier plans for the A350 left a plane that did not compete well with the 787. Can the new A350 equal or exceed the 787 in fuel efficiency and other technological advances? Since Boeing has only recently entered the development stage it seems unlikely that Airbus can leap ahead in the mid-size market. Now the most important questions for both A/B are: (1) will the new A350 be a viable competitor for the 787 and (2) can it in any way leap ahead of the 787?
 
lnglive1011yyz
Posts: 1502
Joined: Thu Oct 23, 2003 12:23 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:08 am

Quoting David31998 (Reply 1):
Since Boeing has only recently entered the development stage it seems unlikely that Airbus can leap ahead in the mid-size market

Why not?

I had the exact same 'argument" with a friend yesterday.

Boeing has lept forward in the development in the mid-size market. Airbus now has the ability to sit back, take a look at what the market wants, re-evaluate, and perhaps, leap-frog Boeing in the future with their offering?

This is the way that competing businesses work.

I laugh at how many people here say that one side or the other is failing, has lost the touch, etc.

Airbus made a good decision to re-vamp the "350" since their customers were asking them to, and they obviously realize what they were offering wasn't going to be sufficient.

1011yyz
Pack your bags, we're going on a sympathy trip!
 
justplanes
Posts: 837
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:31 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:18 am

This has got to make those airlines who picked the plane look a bit foolish... unless price was all they were really interested in...
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:28 am

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 2):
perhaps, leap-frog Boeing in the future with their offering?

I doubt there is that much new technology available in the next 3-6 years to actually leapfrog the Boeing 787. It's going to be difficult for Airbus to match the 787 performance.

What Airbus is doing is replacing the A346 and hijaking the 773ER from its crown. But the problem I see with this is that the large the plane the less market there is for it... So by simply growing the A350 w/o properly addressing the larger market 220-300 seat planes could be very risky.

It's fine to publicy admit failure but you need to adress the much larger 220 to 300 longhaul plane to replace the A330, 332, 333, 762, 763, 764, 772, MD11, DC10s, etc... than just simply building a larger 350 variant.

Show me what you got Airbus...
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
CF188A
Posts: 680
Joined: Sun May 07, 2006 12:27 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:31 am

This topic is asking for a A VS B war..... but I quite frankly cant wait for the next 10 years to unfold. People make it sound like Airbus is packing its bags and they are doomed forever. I think everyone makes mistakes... especially in this business  . Just another thing .....if your developing a machine that costs 200+ million per unit, I would rather make a mistake now then when its in developmental process.

On a side note, I would love to see an a.net user name with the US flag beside it.... beginning a thread... in which the title reads "Airbus will pose harsh challenge to 787 Design" ... or pherhaps "Airbus improves A350 design 1000:1" or even "Boeing fights to secure more 787 orders" (due to the possible ... more profitable A350<<< would be located inside the thread)

.... feel free to think of some others. We should all stop trying to plan the future. Last time I was in history class, we were reading about how many said it was impossible for man to sustain controlled and powered flight  . They did didnt they? The more bazar things do indeed happen so lets let it all play out as the years approach 

[Edited 2006-05-15 02:34:54]
Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die tomorrow~ RIP ... LJFM
 
Jet-lagged
Posts: 818
Joined: Mon Mar 04, 2002 11:58 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:32 am

Quoting David31998 (Reply 1):
Now the most important questions for both A/B are: (1) will the new A350 be a viable competitor for the 787 and (2) can it in any way leap ahead of the 787?

For (1) above . . . it certainly could be. Airbus has access to the same universe of suppliers and engineers that Boeing does, and could duplicate the composites, engines, internal environment, etc. For (2) I'm a little less optimistic, but if the A350/A370 is introduced 5 years later, then it probably would, at least in some areas.

From Boeing's perspective, they should work to accelerate the launch of the 787 as much as possible, so that they capture so much of the market so fast, the cost of conversion to the new A350/A370 will make it uneconomical for many customers, no matter how good Airbus can improve it in the next 3 to 5 years, and so Airbus will have to wait until the 787s are being retired to make a big return to the market.

That would encourage Boeing to:
- open a second production line
- continue their movement into after sales support for business and customer retention

Boeing is sitting pretty now:
- ~350 orders from a number of serious airlines
- figure 50% more for options conversation (175)
- it is reasonable to expect 300 orders from other U.S. carriers
- they can find another 200 frames from other carriers not yet signing up

That totals 1025 frames. I think these numbers will apply no matter what Airbus counters with, if Boeing doesn't mess things up from here on.

For us aviation fanatics, the good news is that Airbus will need to, and will, introduce a very interesting plane if they go the new route.
 
david31998
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 4:49 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:35 am

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 2):
Boeing has lept forward in the development in the mid-size market. Airbus now has the ability to sit back, take a look at what the market wants, re-evaluate, and perhaps, leap-frog Boeing in the future with their offering?

This is the way that competing businesses work.

I laugh at how many people here say that one side or the other is failing, has lost the touch, etc.

I am not saying anyone is failing. Airbus is doing well, but they have a significant challenge trying to compete with the 787. The time between development of the 787 and 350 is very small and therefore, technological advances will be negligible. Boeing anticipated a quick response by Airbus and they are pushing the the limits of their manufacturing ability and tech know-how. The question is can the new 350 measure up to the 787?
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:37 am

Quoting David31998 (Reply 1):
The earlier plans for the A350 left a plane that did not compete well with the 787. Can the new A350 equal or exceed the 787 in fuel efficiency and other technological advances? Since Boeing has only recently entered the development stage it seems unlikely that Airbus can leap ahead in the mid-size market. Now the most important questions for both A/B are: (1) will the new A350 be a viable competitor for the 787 and (2) can it in any way leap ahead of the 787?

I don't think that is the question. I think Airbus has shifted goals to countering the older portion of Boeing's product line, the 777. There will be overlap with the 540K lbs MTOW 787-10 if/when that gets launched, but I suspect right from the start Airbus wants to create a higher MTOW aircraft that will allow 8000-9000nm range in the 300pax category. They will have to use something other than the 787 engines, unless they go the quad route again. The resulting aircraft won't be a leader on CASM compared to the 787-10, but it will have capability in terms of payload-range. But Boeing is likely to come out with a higher MTOW 787-10 at some point, and that will likely be a better performer than the 300 pax version of the revised A350 for most missions.

They may offer something in the 250pax space, but it will probably be a weak offering in relation to the 787-9 as it probably will be relatively heavy.

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 4):
What Airbus is doing is replacing the A346 and hijaking the 773ER from its crown. But the problem I see with this is that the large the plane the less market there is for it... So by simply growing the A350 w/o properly addressing the larger market 220-300 seat planes could be very risky.

The other problem is that they would be releasing this 773ER competitor 10 years after it went into service. Boeing will likely have something out within 5 years of the -1000 EIS in that space, whether it be a 773LR or the Y3. Given Airbus's long development cycles they really need to be sure that Boeing won't clip their wings a few years after EIS like Boeing did with the 773ER to the A346.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
sunrisevalley
Posts: 4950
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:54 am

This thread is becoming a parallel of RE: FI: Embattled Airbus A350 Rethink To Be "Drama (by Widebodyphotog May 11 2006 in Civil Aviation)#ID2766138

iin which this whole topic was beaten to death ad nauseum. My only comment is that I think part of the answer to A's dilemma lies in learning how to design a weight efficient structure. This issue was well outlined in the afore mentioned thread by some of the posters. When oil was $25 a barrel it didn't matter too much but today it is a pre-eminent issue.
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:57 am

Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):
Despite the revamping the "all new" A350 will probably still be heavier than the 787 IMO.

Funny. There is something here that I fail to understand. How important is the issue of weight when comparing different models of aircrafts?

Sure I understand that if you can make an airplane A 10t lighter then airplane A will be a more efficient aircrafts (provided that its specs. for MTOW etc. does not change). However, comparing different models to each other with roughly the same size something does not hold water. Try compare the 787-8 to the 767-300ER. Two airplanes with roughly the same seating (about 210-220) seats.

Max ranges of the two aircrafs are different. However, that might not reflect the construction of the two airplanes (explaining why the one is more heavier than the other) as it might rather indicate that the one of the two is more efficient than the other and by carrying the same amount of fuel will go that much further. Range cannot be used meaningfully in this context.

MTOW might be the thing to compare. MTOW is what the construction of the plane in terms of strength must take into consideration. Then it doesn't matter what combination of pax, cargo and fuel you are carrying. Let us call it the load. The structure must be able to deal with the "load"! And - one should not forget - that the structure must not only carry the load. It must also carry the structure of the airframe itself! MTOW is, therefore, load + airframe. Airframe here is expressed in OEW.

The 787-8 has a higher MTOW than the 767-300ER (with the highest MTOW). 216t against 187t. That is 30t more for the 787-8. Impressive at first.

Less impressive though when comparing the OEW. Here it becomes clear that of those 30t only about 10t can be used for extra load (whatever combination of pax, cargo and fuel that might be)! The 787-8 is no less than 18t HEAVIER than the 767-300ER. 108t for the 787-8 compared to 90t for the 767-300ER.

(All numbers from Boeing's web-site)

Well - I am not to say that the 787-8 is less efficient than the 767. However, I recon that the gain in efficiency of the 787 is not gained by making it's OEW less.... And as what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander: the very same problem might well be involved when comparing the 350 (in whatever version) to the 787...

In other words: Unless someone comes up with a very good explanation I will remain considering the affirmation of a direct correlation between weight (OEW) and operational efficiency between different models of aircrafts to be nothing but uninformed myth. The lighter aircraft might not at all be the most efficient one! The question of operational efficiency seems to me to be far, far, far more complicated than that!

ABBA

[Edited 2006-05-15 03:03:52]
 
airways45
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed May 10, 2000 1:26 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:57 am

Boeing had, and has, always expected Airbus to come up with a rival. That's the game we are all in - 50:50 split or thereabouts.

It's just taken Airbus a while to sort themselves out. And, I'm not sure they are even there yet.

I think Airbus need to get this one right. They shouldn't rush (as they have been doing).

However, best scenario for Boeing was for them to stick with their luke warm A350.

Seattle (and Chicago) have a little more to worry about now they look like there's a new competitor on the block. The previous attempt by Airbus would have meant 787 all the way.

Given that this is the size of airplane that will sell 3,000 over the next 20 years, there's no room for errors (on either side).

Airways45
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:57 am

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 9):
. My only comment is that I think part of the answer to A's dilemma lies in learning how to design a weight efficient structure. This issue was well outlined in the afore mentioned thread by some of the posters. When oil was $25 a barrel it didn't matter too much but today it is a pre-eminent issue

Well said.
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:05 am

Quoting Abba (Reply 10):
Less impressive though when comparing the OEW.

I think OEW is exactly the name of the game. This is what airlines want - light empty structure. But in order to compare apples with apples you have to compare the volume of the cargo space in combination with the square footage of the passenger compartment. Using number of seats can be deceiving since seating vary due to configuration. If you rechecked you would find out that 787 is "more" airplane than 767-300.

[Edited 2006-05-15 03:17:56]
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:11 am

Quoting Airways45 (Reply 11):

Seattle (and Chicago) have a little more to worry about now they look like there's a new competitor on the block. The previous attempt by Airbus would have meant 787 all the way.

lets see how the "old new whatever-it-is" A350 comes out first....

we'll know more in the next month or two.....

[Edited 2006-05-15 03:25:19]
"Up the Irons!"
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:18 am

Quoting Saturn5 (Reply 13):
I think OEW is exactly the name of the game. This is what airlines want - light empty structure. But in order to compare apples with apples you have to compare the volume of the cargo space in combination with the square footage of the passenger compartment. Using number of seats can be deceiving since seating vary due to configuration

I'll in principle agree with that (but it becomes complicated!). However, I believe the numbers for the 787-8 and the 767-300ER are such that to use the number of seats as a very roughly indication of the two being of about the same size is good enough for my argument here. In particular when the MTOW are so close to each other.

Look at the wingspan of the two! The 787-8 has a span of 60m while the 787-300 only has a span of 47m. It seems that most of the weight savings for the 787 has been aerodynamically "invested" in a much longer wing! Things like that complicate matters!


ABBA
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8543
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 11:02 am

Quoting Abba (Reply 15):
However, I believe the numbers for the 787-8 and the 767-300ER are such that to use the number of seats as a very roughly indication of the two being of about the same size is good enough for my argument here.

The B787-8 is closer to the B764 and A332 than the B763. In fact, the B788 is only a few square meters smaller than the A332/A358. In terms of passenger capacity, the -8 can match the A358 with 9-abreast seating and still maintain relative comfort.

Quoting Abba (Reply 10):
The lighter aircraft might not at all be the most efficient one! The question of operational efficiency seems to me to be far, far, far more complicated than that!

It is, but your slew of logic was so inprecise it isn't even worth delving into in this thread.

There are too many variables you exclude to make that sort of direct correlation between OEW. Why compare to the B763ER, rather than the A358? Their propulsion technology, range, mission limits, etc are more anaglous.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 12:29 pm

The mistake wasn't the A350, it's the A380--Airbus misjudged the market and now they are paying dearly for it.

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 4):
I doubt there is that much new technology available in the next 3-6 years to actually leapfrog the Boeing 787.

Airbus can't wait 3-6 years, they got to get humpin on this immediately in order to finish it by 2012.Already there's skepticism that 2012 is doable

Quote:
Such a decision would delay the first delivery date by a year and could double the development costs, currently estimated at four billion dollars, the source said.

Other sources spoke of a two-year delay


Quoting CF188A (Reply 5):
On a side note, I would love to see an a.net user name with the US flag beside it.... beginning a thread... in which the title reads "Airbus will pose harsh challenge to 787 Design" ... or pherhaps "Airbus improves A350 design 1000:1"

Sorry, I don't do fiction  Wink

[Edited 2006-05-15 05:42:58]
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 12:44 pm

I agree with your points in principe. However, even if you compare the OEW of the 764 to the 788 you will still not see the true gain in efficiency of the 787 over the 764. What I believe is that OEW does not say as much about an aircraft's efficiency relative to other "similar" aircrafts as some people here seem to believe (and it is highly debatable what "similar" might mean in this context). That the 350 is heavier than the 787 might not say very much about the efficiency of the two aircrafts relative to each other! What I tried to do was to show just how misguided such a comparison of OEW might actually be!

Abba

PS I will disagree with your affirmation that an 788 with 9 abreast maintain relative comfort!
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8543
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 1:18 pm

Quoting Abba (Reply 18):
PS I will disagree with your affirmation that an 788 with 9 abreast maintain relative comfort!

Go ahead, but that assumption is proving to be the bane of the A350 program.

Boeing has shown the B787 to be an effective 9-abreast aircraft without sacraficing economy-level comfort. That puts a tremendous dent in the A350's seat/mile projections.

Quoting Abba (Reply 18):
What I tried to do was to show just how misguided such a comparison of OEW might actually be!

Abba, there's been a hundred and four topics on this subject so I will be brief. Your assumption that OEW is not one of the most criticial indicators of aircraft efficency is so wrong it is laugable.

Higher OEW requires higher take-off thrust and higher cruise thrust. Additional weight means more induced drag. Higher weight means more wear and tear on the landing gear and replaceable items like brake pads and tires. Additional weight means higher landing fees and airport costs. These are not trivial dollars we are talking about.

The A350 is 15 tons heavier, carries no significant payload any significant distance further, and features less optimal propulsion than the B787. That leaves no opportunity for the A350 to have superior economics
 
ap305
Posts: 907
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 1:40 pm

There is still no factual evidence that the "new" proposed a350 is inferior to the 787 in any way. There appears to be some sort of assumption among some members that Boeing holds a technical advantage over Airbus.The whole composites vs al-li is still a theory. Until Airbus releases the oew, mtow and fuel usage data for the "new" -800 and -900(the -1000 has no 787 rival yet)figures, we will not be able to know for FACT if the composite fuselage of the 787 provides some sort of a technical advantage over a al-li fuselage. As i said before in a previous post- the whole weight issue of the "current" a350 MAY be down to the usage of a antiquated fuselage sub-structure that owes its roots to the ta10/ta11 studies. Until we are able to prove that a composite fuselage does indeed provide a definite advantage i would hope that members refrain from stating what are unproven theories as facts.

[Edited 2006-05-15 06:48:20]

[Edited 2006-05-15 06:49:00]
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 1:50 pm

Quoting Abba (Reply 10):
In other words: Unless someone comes up with a very good explanation I will remain considering the affirmation of a direct correlation between weight (OEW) and operational efficiency between different models of aircrafts to be nothing but uninformed myth. The lighter aircraft might not at all be the most efficient one! The question of operational efficiency seems to me to be far, far, far more complicated than that!

I think I covered exactly the same question pretty well in a thread about a year ago, though it took me several tries. Without digging that back up (you're welcome to), I'll take another stab at it.

There are three components of efficiency in flight:
a) structural efficiency,
b) SFC, and
c) aerodynamic efficiency.
All three are important.

Structural efficiency is usually measured as payload/OEW or load (payload + fuel)/OEW. Comparisons of structural efficiency are only valid for aircraft of comparable range. Why? Because increasing the range capability of an aircraft (that carries a given payload) requires increasing OEW (given SFC and aerodynamic efficiency). That's the problem with your comparison between the B767 and the B787. Add enough structure to a B767 to carry enough fuel to match the B787's range and then compare structural efficiency. Don't forget the higher thrust engines, upgraded landing gear, etc. that will be needed.
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 2:39 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 19):
Higher OEW requires higher take-off thrust and higher cruise thrust. Additional weight means more induced drag. Higher weight means more wear and tear on the landing gear and replaceable items like brake pads and tires. Additional weight means higher landing fees and airport costs. These are not trivial dollars we are talking about.

The A350 is 15 tons heavier, carries no significant payload any significant distance further, and features less optimal propulsion than the B787. That leaves no opportunity for the A350 to have superior economics

Strange then that Airbus has been able to sell the 350 at all then - even to airlines (such as Finn Air) that were to replace third party products and wasn't committed to either A or B. Are these people plain stupid? Are the people at Airbus so stupid that they think that the entire airline industry cannot come up with an argument as simple as yours above? Just dream on if you like!

Again - I am not saying that weight does not matter. Of cause it does! Only that it is very difficult to compare different models with each other which might be build according to different philosophies. I have no problem believing that the 787 is a more efficient aircraft than the 350 (as it used to be offered at least) in the view of many people who should be able to form an informed aopinion on the matter. But I believe that many more things than just the difference in OEW per se contribute to that.

There seems to be a balance between eg. size (hence weight) of the wing and its aerodynamic efficiency. Different philosophies might well put the optimum point of trade-off between the two differently. Nevertheless, the 350 has a one meter wider wingspan than the 788/9 and might also have a larger wing area. What these differences (which has implications for overall weight) means in terms of aerodynamic efficiency I certainly cannot come even close to form an educated opinion about. And I feel that I am not alone.

Abba
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 2:42 pm

Quoting Ap305 (Reply 20):
The whole composites vs al-li is still a theory. Until Airbus releases the oew, mtow and fuel usage data for the "new" -800 and -900(the -1000 has no 787 rival yet)figures

Not to say anything bad about Airbus' planes, but yes the "new" A358's number has not been released yet, and we are still guessing what airbus is going to do. However, judging from the "old all new" A358, the composite Vs. Al-Li, it looks like composite planes have a distinct structural weight advantage.

I am sure when Airbus first released the numbers, it has already put its design weight to the "lightest" possible. This weight is probably not going to change significantly unless there is a fundamental change in the Airbus' plane design and materials. I think a change in fuselage size alone will not reduce this OEW difference, because A358 should not suffer from aspect ratio problem as A346 does.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
columba
Posts: 5043
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 3:01 pm

I would say that Airbus has learned from the mistakes Boeing did in the past.
The 787 a newly desigend, high developed aircraft that offers commonality with other Boeing products like the 777.
Airbus has learned its lesson over the last year that they have to come up with a real competitioner instead of a warmed up derivate like Boeing did with the 767-400 to compete with the A330 ten years ago.
Good for Airbus that they noticed that they would fail with that aircraft before it rolled-out.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
manni
Posts: 4049
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:48 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 3:36 pm

Taken from the article for wich a link is provided in the first post.

"Last Thursday, sources at the Airbus plant at Toulouse in southern France said the board of EADS was likely to opt this month to develop the A350 as a new plane with an enlarged fuselage and new wings.

Such a decision would delay the first delivery date by a year and could double the development costs, currently estimated at four billion dollars, the source said."

Interesting to read that the so called 'sources' at EADS expect a delay by a year and a production cost of US$8 billion. That's in very big contrast with the 2 year, AT LEAST (as predicted by our resident aviation analysts  laughing  ) and a development cost of US$10 billion. Perhaps it's better to wait for an official pressrelease from Airbus...

Quoting Ap305 (Reply 20):
There is still no factual evidence that the "new" proposed a350 is inferior to the 787 in any way.

Being manufactured by Airbus seems reason enough to expect it to be inferior. Got me wondering... Why was it that Boeing came up with the 787?

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 17):
Already there's skepticism that 2012 is doable

By who? A student, a retired ramper, a flight attendant, a car dealer, a nurse, a school teacher, a librarian and a builder on airliners.net? Try to make a distinction between various rumours. A 'source' at EADS (did you read the article?) is in most cases better informed than a senior gate agent at Continental, when it comes to Airbus. Now, if that senior gate agent tells you that todays EWR-IAH flights were fully booked and the sources at EADS tells you they were only 50% full... would you believe the person at EADS?

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 2):
Airbus made a good decision to re-vamp the "350" since their customers were asking them to, and they obviously realize what they were offering wasn't going to be sufficient.

It doesn't matter what Airbus does, the Boeing choirboys will always damn it. If Airbus decides not to change the A350, they'll be called stubborn and incompetent, if Airbus does change, they're running after the facts, can never tip on Boeings technologie and are incompetent. Fortunately the REAL airline CEO's will almost certainly have a good look at the new proposal, before deciding wether or not it reaches, succeeds or isn't what they expected.
SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3923
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 4:00 pm

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 23):
However, judging from the "old all new" A358, the composite Vs. Al-Li, it looks like composite planes have a distinct structural weight advantage.

German bizplane manucafturer did a comparision between "all metal" (likely all AL) and "composites" for their new SPn jet. The difference in weight was less than 10% in favour "composites". AL-LI is already by definition lighter (just take a look on respective weights), so we can assume that the gap between composites and AL-LI might be very small when it comes to weight differences.

I'm not a production engineer, but I think it could be possible to do a hybrid composite/AL-LI A350 fuselage. The damage prone areas, especially around the front door(s) will be AL-LI, the main part of the fuselage where the damage risk is small composites. In terms of weight the difference should be negelctable, but it could offer an "easier maintenance" strucutre than the 787 full-composite does. If it make sense in terms of assembly time etc is a question I cannot answer.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
Oykie
Posts: 1563
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 4:39 pm

Quoting Lnglive1011yyz (Reply 2):
Boeing has lept forward in the development in the mid-size market. Airbus now has the ability to sit back, take a look at what the market wants, re-evaluate, and perhaps, leap-frog Boeing in the future with their offering?

The only way I can see Airbus being able to fully compete head on with the 787 is if they offer a composite fuselage. The 787 has some maintenance benefits that the A350 with Alu-li lacks. Of course the larger diameter fuselage will make the largest A350-1000 more structurally efficient than the A346-600 which it will replace.

Quoting JustPlanes (Reply 3):
This has got to make those airlines who picked the plane look a bit foolish... unless price was all they were really interested in...

Finnair said that the later EIS did not matter as long as the product gets even better.

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 8):
I think Airbus has shifted goals to countering the older portion of Boeing's product line, the 777.

I believe you maybe right Atmx2000. It looks like Airbus is opting the A350 in the upper end of the 787 range and at the same time wants to take on the 777-300ER. This makes me wonder what Airbus will offer int the 200-250 seat category?

Quoting Abba (Reply 10):
Funny. There is something here that I fail to understand. How important is the issue of weight when comparing different models of aircrafts?

IMO the importance is not the weight difference between Alu-li and composite, but rather that a composite fuselage will perhaps need less maintenance since there will be no corrosion, and that way Boeing can also offer a better humidity on board the plane.

Quoting Airways45 (Reply 11):
Boeing had, and has, always expected Airbus to come up with a rival. That's the game we are all in - 50:50 split or thereabouts.

I believe Boeing expected Airbus to react instantly, instead of saying that the A330 would be able to face the new competition.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 4:57 pm

Quoting BoeingBus (Reply 4):

I doubt there is that much new technology available in the next 3-6 years to actually leapfrog the Boeing 787. It's going to be difficult for Airbus to match the 787 performance.

Why would it be difficult for Airbus to match the 787, given that they have a few years of advances in manufacturing technology and materials on their side?

Quoting Jet-lagged (Reply 6):

From Boeing's perspective, they should work to accelerate the launch of the 787 as much as possible, so that they capture so much of the market so fast, the cost of conversion to the new A350/A370 will make it uneconomical for many customers, no matter how good Airbus can improve it in the next 3 to 5 years, and so Airbus will have to wait until the 787s are being retired to make a big return to the market.

Accelerating the schedule of the 787 is in practice impossible, or if remotely possible it would likely be extremely expensive. Besides, the word is that the 787 is already running 1-2 months behind it's existing schedule ("7-late-7")

http://www.forbes.com/free_forbes/2006/0417/078.html

A point I didn't even realize is that Airbus can affect the 787 schedule by commenting on the FAA procedures when they're laid open to the public for review.

Quoting Ap305 (Reply 20):
The whole composites vs al-li is still a theory. Until Airbus releases the oew, mtow and fuel usage data for the "new" -800 and -900(the -1000 has no 787 rival yet)figures, we will not be able to know for FACT if the composite fuselage of the 787 provides some sort of a technical advantage over a al-li fuselage.

I agree.

Quoting Manni (Reply 25):

Interesting to read that the so called 'sources' at EADS expect a delay by a year and a production cost of US$8 billion. That's in very big contrast with the 2 year, AT LEAST (as predicted by our resident aviation analysts laughing ) and a development cost of US$10 billion. Perhaps it's better to wait for an official pressrelease from Airbus...

The 1 vs. 2 - year delay is a valid point and I also paid attention to it when reading the article. However, EUR8bn is more or less USD10bn.

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 26):

German bizplane manucafturer did a comparision between "all metal" (likely all AL) and "composites" for their new SPn jet. The difference in weight was less than 10% in favour "composites". AL-LI is already by definition lighter (just take a look on respective weights), so we can assume that the gap between composites and AL-LI might be very small when it comes to weight differences.

In addition to Al-Li, the bizplane maker likely doesn't have access to laser-beam welding, which can reduce the weight of any Al-Li fuselage further by a few percent.
 
manni
Posts: 4049
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:48 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 5:12 pm

Quoting Joni (Reply 28):
However, EUR8bn is more or less USD10bn.

Joni,

In the article is written that the current development costs estimated at US$4 billion could double. That makes it US$8 billion (wich is slightly more than EUR6 billion). Or about the same as the new 787 is estimated to cost to develop.
SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 5:22 pm

Quoting Manni (Reply 29):


In the article is written that the current development costs estimated at US$4 billion could double. That makes it US$8 billion (wich is slightly more than EUR6 billion). Or about the same as the new 787 is estimated to cost to develop.

Ok, you're right I missed that.
 
TWAtwaTWA
Posts: 134
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 5:18 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 5:27 pm

Being the first to the market has its advantages (prestige, early market share), but also disadvantages (competition reacts to mistakes and imperfections).

Airbus certainly has many engineers working overtime on its reaction, and as others have said, the next 10 years will be very exciting indeed. While the A380 will become a Guinness World Record holder, The B787 and A35x will have the lion's share of orders and will set the standard for the future of this industry.
We're your kind of airline. Uh, I mean, We *were* your kind of airline.
 
Oykie
Posts: 1563
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 5:56 pm

Quoting TWAtwaTWA (Reply 31):

Welcome to Airliners.net TWAtwaTWA! I take it your a TWA fan?  Smile

Quoting Joni (Reply 28):
Accelerating the schedule of the 787 is in practice impossible, or if remotely possible it would likely be extremely expensive. Besides, the word is that the 787 is already running 1-2 months behind it's existing schedule ("7-late-7")

I will be very impressed if the Boeing 787 is just 1-2 months behind when it enters service. Although Boeing should focus on time, but more importantly keep the 787 on weight.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 6:39 pm

Quoting OyKIE (Reply 32):

I will be very impressed if the Boeing 787 is just 1-2 months behind when it enters service. Although Boeing should focus on time, but more importantly keep the 787 on weight.

There's still time for the schedule to slip further.. And the 787 is also a bit overweight

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_25/b3938037_mz011.htm

http://www.finanznachrichten.de/nach...ichten-2005-04/artikel-1899681.asp

Let's hope all goes well in the end.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:29 pm

Quoting Manni (Reply 25):
Interesting to read that the so called 'sources' at EADS expect a delay by a year and a production cost of US$8 billion. That's in very big contrast with the 2 year, AT LEAST (as predicted by our resident aviation analysts A 'source' at EADS (did you read the article?) is in most cases better informed than a senior gate agent at Continental, when it comes to Airbus.

The sources at EADS also told us for many years that the first A380, would be delivered last April  Yeah sure
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:36 pm

Quoting Abba (Reply 22):
There seems to be a balance between eg. size (hence weight) of the wing and its aerodynamic efficiency.

There is truth in this, in theory, but in practice one does not sacrifice aerodynamic efficiency of a wing to save weight -- at least not to any significant degree. Once the wingspan has been decided, the shape of the wing is determined without regard to how much the wing will weigh. On the other hand, wings are often shorter than the aerodynamic optimum in order to fit in airport gates.

Quoting Abba (Reply 22):
the 350 has a one meter wider wingspan than the 788/9 and might also have a larger wing area.

The wing area of the "old all-new" A350 is quite a bit larger than that of the B787 -- more so than a one meter difference in wingspan would suggest. However, the A350 has the larger wing area because it is heavier and therefore needs a larger wing area. It would be a mistake to think the A350 is heavier because it has a larger wing area.

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 23):

I am sure when Airbus first released the numbers, it has already put its design weight to the "lightest" possible.

No. Widebodyphotog has done a good job of explaining this.

Quoting Manni (Reply 25):
Interesting to read that the so called 'sources' at EADS expect a delay by a year and a production cost of US$8 billion. That's in very big contrast with the 2 year, AT LEAST (as predicted by our resident aviation analysts laughing ) and a development cost of US$10 billion. Perhaps it's better to wait for an official pressrelease from Airbus...

Given Airbus' recent performance in meeting claims on development costs and delivery times, I would put my money on the A.net experts.
 
manni
Posts: 4049
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:48 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:53 pm

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 34):

The sources at EADS also told us for many years that the first A380, would be delivered last April Yeah sure

Great, you continue with going with the rumours from the retired gate agent, 14 year old student, nurse, police officer and rubbish collector then.  laughing 

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 35):
Given Airbus' recent performance in meeting claims on development costs and delivery times, I would put my money on the A.net experts.

 laughing  Those experts that can't reveal their sources for confidentiality reasons...
SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 9:59 pm

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 34):
The sources at EADS also told us for many years that the first A380, would be delivered last April

Actually, it was March. That slipped to May. Then it slipped again to November.

Quoting Manni (Reply 36):
Those experts that can't reveal their sources for confidentiality reasons...

In this case, the analysis was based on the data published by Airbus and Boeing.
 
mrcomet
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2005 5:53 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:01 pm

It's not worth all the speculation now. We'll see how Airbus does with the new plane. I've been harsh on the A350 as have many and we have turned out to be right. Now the A.netters should show the humility Airbus has and apologize to NAV20 and the others who pointed out the mistakes.

Now, going forward, I'll withhold judgement to see what they can come up with. The Boeing supporters should be careful what they say in the meantime. Airbus might have a difficult job ahead of them but what they do have is a clear target to beat, time, plenty of feedback from the 787 and low/no cost loans. Unless Boeing has created a masterpiece, I think Airbus has a good shot at topping them. And if they do, Boeing might be in poor shape. You need to be able to cash in for a decade on a plane and Boeing will have only gotten 4 or 5 years out of their investment.

The biggest challenges are:

- beating the 787 in price
- matching CASM with alloys and not composites
- keeping the A350 sales to date away from Boeing
- selling a paper airplane against the real numbers Boeing will soon get.

Finally, I think the men to blame in the Airbus problems is Forgeard and Leahy. Forgeard because he's a clown and Leahy because he wasted so much time trying to sell inferior products with hype and discounts. Each should get much less respect then they have.
The dude abides
 
CWFan
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 2:58 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:08 pm

Mr. Comet:

Nice post. But I fail to understand how the new 350/370 can beat the 787 in the given seat range that the 787 is attacking (now the 777 is a different story). You list the challenges and you also say:

"Unless Boeing has created a masterpiece, I think Airbus has a good shot at topping them."

How on earth can this realistically happen? How do you propose the same fuse (diameter) can attack 220-350 seats as compared to the 787's more optimised fuse diameter? Esp. given the efficiency of composites for the stretch, thus making the 787 stretches more efficient re: structural weight than an equiv metal tube?
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:16 pm

Quoting MrComet (Reply 39):
The biggest challenges are:

- beating the 787 in price
- matching CASM with alloys and not composites
- keeping the A350 sales to date away from Boeing
- selling a paper airplane against the real numbers Boeing will soon get.

I think you've got that exactly right. The "new all-new" A350 will have to not only beat the CASM of the B777-300ER but match the CASM of the B787-10. That will not be easy.
 
manni
Posts: 4049
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2001 1:48 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:20 pm

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 37):

They seem to be better qualified than the people working at EADS Wink

I see, I've got the picture  laughing . Here's one for you BoomBoom.

I was talking to my dentist today, he told me that the people working for EADS are all made out of chocolat and are replaced on a daily basis during the summer because of the heat. The Swiss company, who provides these chocolat employees, has contacted Boeing. In cooperation with Boeing they will know develop composite employees not only will they have to pay for the development cost in potatos they will also have to pay roalties at cost of 500KG carrots and 3 watermelons for each employee produced. The governement of Walt Disney land has promised to provide them repayable loans, and will turn their parking lots in potato fields.
SUPPORT THE LEBANESE CIVILIANS
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:24 pm

Quoting MrComet (Reply 39):

Finally, I think the men to blame in the Airbus problems is Forgeard and Leahy. Forgeard because he's a clown and Leahy because he wasted so much time trying to sell inferior products with hype and discounts. Each should get much less respect then they have.

I think Leahy's been pretty successful in selling the A350 so far, not to mention that the inferiority of the design re. the 787 has been exaggerated.

Quoting CWFan (Reply 40):
How do you propose the same fuse (diameter) can attack 220-350 seats as compared to the 787's more optimised fuse diameter? Esp. given the efficiency of composites for the stretch, thus making the 787 stretches more efficient re: structural weight than an equiv metal tube?

The new A350, if the rumours are true, will have a wider fuselage diameter than the previous design. What do you mean by the "efficiency of composites for a stretch"?
 
Oykie
Posts: 1563
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2006 9:21 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:27 pm

Quoting Joni (Reply 33):
There's still time for the schedule to slip further.. And the 787 is also a bit overweight

Yup. But IMO keeping the weight on target is more important than having an exact schedule in the longer run. A schedule is nice, but if something unexpected shows up, one must react in order to make it right. From that reasoning the delay of the A380 and the slippage of the A350 by two years is not that important if it makes the product better.
Dream no small dream; it lacks magic. Dream large, then go make that dream real - Donald Douglas
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13754
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:49 pm

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Reply 26):
German bizplane manucafturer did a comparision between "all metal" (likely all AL) and "composites" for their new SPn jet. The difference in weight was less than 10% in favour "composites".

Are you saying that 10% is not significant? According to http://www.grobspn.com/aircraft_4.php?pageID=8 the MTOW of the Grob SPn is 13,889 lbs so this means there is 1388 lbs more payload available due to composites. That's a heck of a lot more pax/cargo/fuel that can be carried for a 10 seat bizjet! In fact the payload specified is 2,491 lbs so if composites were not used, it'd have less than half the payload!
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 10:49 pm

I'm still curious what will happen to the 100 or so firm orders that Airbus already took for the "old all new" A350. I presume that Airbus will try to persuade the customers to convert these orders to the "new all new" A350, and cover for the delay in delivery date with leased A330 as interim solution. However, there are few financial issues with that.

The A350s sold so far were probably offerred at substantial discount and/or favorable financial terms. I'm not implying that Airbus gave away these airplanes for free, but lower price was probably the only real advantage that Airbus could offer for the "old all new" A350 against the B787, which is (was) a superior airplane from the technical standpoint. Also, its pricing structure was based on an estimated $4b development cost - now that the development cost has doubled, it could mean that these 100 or so A350 were sold below their actual cost.

On top of the pricing issue, Airbus will have to compensate the airlines for delivering the airplanes later than originally committed.

Now, the "new all new" A350 is superior than the "old all new" one so it probably can be priced higher - however I don't think Airbus "popularity" with airlines would increase if they tell the customers who bought the A350 that they have to pay more for the airplane they already bought.

So while the "new all new" A350 is a move in the right direction to compete against the B787, the first 100 airplanes sold so far could actually represent a substantial financial loss to Airbus.
 
abba
Posts: 1379
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 11:02 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 35):
However, the A350 has the larger wing area because it is heavier and therefore needs a larger wing area. It would be a mistake to think the A350 is heavier because it has a larger wing area.

It is heavier because it has a larger wing area. The lager wing does have a weight prize! However, it is another question whether all the 15 extra tones can be explained in this way.

All the problems unexplained I still find it interresting to compare the 787 to the 767. With all the new materials involved in building the 787 we simply do not get a lighter 767 style aircraft (the extra range of the 787 is to an extent due to it being more efficient - it simply gets longer on the same fuel). What we get is a (perhaps even heavier) aircraft but with a much larger wing! That's worth a thought!

Abba
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13754
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 11:10 pm

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 46):
The A350s sold so far were probably offerred at substantial discount and/or favorable financial terms. I'm not implying that Airbus gave away these airplanes for free, but lower price was probably the only real advantage that Airbus could offer for the "old all new" A350 against the B787, which is (was) a superior airplane from the technical standpoint. Also, its pricing structure was based on an estimated $4b development cost - now that the development cost has doubled, it could mean that these 100 or so A350 were sold below their actual cost.

Interesting points, but also keep in mind a lot of the A350 customers are "friends and family". In the case of US/HP, the order was tied to a loan that helped them get out of bankruptcy. So, I think this particular set of customers will not be inclined to "put the screws to" Airbus, but you never know.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 11:35 pm

Quoting Abba (Reply 47):
It is heavier because it has a larger wing area. The lager wing does have a weight prize! However, it is another question whether all the 15 extra tones can be explained in this way.

Interesting theory... Yeah sure
If it's heavier because of its larger wing, why didn't they shrink the wing?...
Abba, start believing what Zvezda is reading, you can learn a lot more that way...

Quoting Abba (Reply 47):

All the problems unexplained I still find it interesting to compare the 787 to the 767. With all the new materials involved in building the 787 we simply do not get a lighter 767 style aircraft (the extra range of the 787 is to an extent due to it being more efficient - it simply gets longer on the same fuel). What we get is a (perhaps even heavier) aircraft but with a much larger wing! That's worth a thought!

The 787 is heavier since its a much larger aircraft, it's that simple! It's both larger in size, and it can lift much more payload & fuel. And to support that extra weight (payload and fuel) it has to have a stronger structure, hence the higher OEW. If they built the 787 to the same size and MTOW of the 767, its OEW would be lower by a good margin. Stop comparing apples and oranges Abba...
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: Airbus Chief Admits To Mistakes Over New A350

Mon May 15, 2006 11:47 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 35):
No. Widebodyphotog has done a good job of explaining this.

Do you have a link to Widebodyphotog's explanation? I am not trying to question your credibility, but I am honestly interested in reading the explanation. I always asume that whatever weight manufacturer's put in the proposal will be sort of the "target" weight they will achieve at EIS, which is probably the lightest they can get within a set of constraint, such as time and material technology.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane

Who is online