douwd20
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 3:45 am

WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:11 pm

The WSJ is reporting that Airbus has meet with key customers over the revamped A350 and intial reactions are good.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1150...78418.html?mod=hps_us_my_companies

Fair Use Extract:

According to people familiar with what Airbus is proposing, the plan is for a family of three jetliners that would be bigger than the initial A350 and have greater range. One of the planes will fly further than the 787 and than the A350's promised range of 8,800 nautical miles. Airbus hopes the new family of jets will compete with both the 787 and Boeing's larger 777 model. Airbus wants to officially unveil its new A350 model at or before the Farnborough Air Show outside London in mid-July.

Singapore Airlines Chief Executive Chew Choon Seng, one of the two vocal critics of the original A350, said last week that based on what he knew of Airbus's revised plans, the new jetliner "would make them much more competitive against the 787." Singapore Airlines is looking to order several-dozen planes in the size range.

General Electric Co. and Rolls-Royce PLC were developing engines for the original version, but GE is hesitating about offering engines for the new model, according to people close to the issue. GE has heavy investment commitments on other Airbus and Boeing models, and risks cannibalizing its own sales at Boeing, these people said. Rolls-Royce is in talks with Airbus on the plane, these people added. It remains unclear if the world's other maker of big jet engines, United Technologies Corp.'s Pratt & Whitney unit, is in the running.

What to name the new plane also is under debate. Some officials at the company argue that an all-new plane deserves a fresh moniker. Others worry about the embarrassment of ditching a widely marketed trademark. Some airline and other industry officials have started referring to the new design as the A370. Airbus is also considering linking the model to the much-hyped A380 by calling it the A280, A480, or even A880, said a person familiar with the debate, because the number eight is considered auspicious in parts of Asia, such as China. Another person close to the issue said "A350" stands more than a 50% chance of sticking. Airbus spokeswoman Barbara Kracht said the company won't discuss the issue at this point.
 
columba
Posts: 5045
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:35 pm

Quoting Douwd20 (Thread starter):
Singapore Airlines Chief Executive Chew Choon Seng, one of the two vocal critics of the original A350, said last week that based on what he knew of Airbus's revised plans, the new jetliner "would make them much more competitive against the 787." Singapore Airlines is looking to order several-dozen planes in the size range.

Interesting statement lets see how SQ will decide.
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
douwd20
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri May 13, 2005 3:45 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:41 pm

Quoting Columba (Reply 1):
nteresting statement lets see how SQ will decide.

Indeed they've certainly kept everyone waiting long enough.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 2:49 pm

To me, the key paragraph of the article is the one about engines. GE is 'hesitating', RR is 'in talks', the position of P & W is 'unclear'......

If Airbus can't secure a commitment from at least one engine manufacturer to develop an engine to suit the proposed performance/weight/drag characteristics of the new design, surely the new Airbus model will be still-born?
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:00 pm

According to people familiar with what Airbus is proposing, the plan is for a family of three jetliners that would be bigger than the initial A350 and have greater range.

All three jetliners will be bigger than the initial A350?
Sounds like it will compete with the 777 leaving the 787 the smaller mid-size market all to itself.
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4821
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:33 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
If Airbus can't secure a commitment from at least one engine manufacturer to develop an engine to suit the proposed performance/weight/drag characteristics of the new design, surely the new Airbus model will be still-born?

We know how upset you always are when Airbus receives yet more bad news so let me reassure you that RR will be sure to sign up. Now you can focus on the more upbeat and positive aspects of this report.  Wink

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 4):
Sounds like it will compete with the 777 leaving the 787 the smaller mid-size market all to itself.



Quoting Douwd20 (Thread starter):
Singapore Airlines Chief Executive Chew Choon Seng ... said last week that based on what he knew of Airbus's revised plans, the new jetliner "would make them much more competitive against the 787."

Sounds like the people that run SQ don't agree with you.

The competition between airliners often comes down to shifting people at an advantageous CASM rather than the need to match exactly the competitor's capacity.
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:39 pm

My understanding is that SQ require a 787(8/9) capacity aircraft, have been shown the 370 and deemed it too big. An SQ 787 order is not too far away IMO.
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:45 pm

Hi!

This is a little bit of the big news that will arrive soon!!! Regarding the issue that NAV20 came up with ( engines )....well Airbus will need to have engines for their new airplane right? And the engine manufacturers want Airbus to use their engines right? So NAV20 what's your point? The plane needs engines to fly....so maybe RR, GE and P&W will give their engines has an option for the new Airbus bird right?
regards
CV990, the Maserati of the skies!
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:55 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 5):
let me reassure you that RR will be sure to sign up.



Quoting CV990 (Reply 7):
So NAV20 what's your point?

My point is that engines cost money to develop, all same airframes. I'm equally sure that one or other of the engine manufacturers will sign up - provided that Airbus pays for the development work.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
UTA_flyinghigh
Posts: 6304
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2001 8:46 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:55 pm

Not to rain on your parade but I know for sure it shall (...) not be called the 370 due to the "7" being associated with Boeing.

Don't ask for sources but believe me on this.

UTA  checkeredflag 
Fly to live, live to fly - Air France/KLM Flying Blue Platinum, BMI Diamond Club Gold, Emirates Skywards
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 3:59 pm

Hi NAV20!

I really don't understand you.....do you think that Airbus is "that short of money" that they cannot "pay" for any development costs that might come with the engines involved???? Come on!!! That's a very poor point you coming with indeed! Not only Airbus WILL PAY and maybe ( surprise, surprise!!!! ) they sign up for more than one engine option!
Regards
CV990, the Maserati of the skies!
 
abba
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:07 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 5):
We know how upset you always are when Airbus receives yet more bad news so let me reassure you that RR will be sure to sign up. Now you can focus on the more upbeat and positive aspects of this report

Naw20????!!!!!  rotfl   rotfl   rotfl 

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
My understanding is that SQ require a 787(8/9) capacity aircraft, have been shown the 370 and deemed it too big. An SQ 787 order is not too far away IMO.

I don't think so. The 787- 8/9 seems to me to be far too small for SQ relative to their strategy to deal with the growing number of LCCs in Asia. Their strategy seems to be the opposite of what most traditional US and European carriers have done: Go for big aircrafts (at present nothing smaller than the 777-200) with relative few connections so that the planes can get filled. At the same time they use new aircrafts (and sell used equipment as long as they are able to still get a decent price in the market). Combine the lower operating expense of newer and bigger aircrafts on a per seat basis with a decent service and you have the recipe for SQ being as successful as they are.

The reason why SQ might have been so keen on not simply order the 787 rather than the old 350 could well be because the 787 is simply too small for them. I expect that they are now most likely looking for a program to replace their 777s. Their ashtrays must be about full by now (as the saying goes in the Asian aviation industry). This will also explain why they are in no hurry to go for the 787 as they have no use for the 7 and 8 and might only want the 10 which is not yet on offer (as SQ used to be first with the newest).

Abba
 
sq212
Posts: 263
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:14 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:15 pm

Apparently, QR cannot wait for A370 and decided to go ahead and order 20x 777.

http://www.atwonline.com/news/other.html?issueDate=6%2F13%2F2006

Cheers
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:34 pm

Hi!

Yeah, that's a nice report...."According to sources in London.....that order is BELIEVED...." very, very vague for my taste, very vague!!!
regards
CV990, the Maserati of the skies!
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1577
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 4:36 pm

Engines are critical in the development of any new jetliner. In fact it is probably engine technology rather than airframe technology which really drives new aircraft development. This is because the aerodynamics are already so good that only a few % can be gained from the airframe but 10+% from the engines.(Except for the 787 which will gain a lot of airframe efficiency from decreased weight). So I agree with NAV20 that the engines are the critical weakness in the Airbus proposal, as well as a couple of others related to timing and market segment. Airbus could secure an engine manufacturer by offering engine development money.

Ruscoe
 
keesje
Posts: 8745
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:00 pm

thnx for linking the article

when would SQ's 777 fleet be up for replacement, taking into account their fleet replacement strategy?

Maybe a B789/A370 mix? A330/B777 proved a winning team with many airlines.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4821
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:23 pm

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 14):
So I agree with NAV20 that the engines are the critical weakness in the Airbus proposal

A critical issue for sure, but I cannot see why either of you conclude that it is necessarily a weakness. If anything, Airbus have a strong hand to play.

Put yourself in RR's shoes. They built a lead on the 777 only to watch is slip away through GE's exclusivity. Then they were frozen out of the 747-8. They're holding their own on the 787 so far but GE have more customers and more orders and are likely to continue to leverage 787 sales off the two other Boeing programmes where they have exclusivity. RR will probably still gain a decent share of the 787 programme but on other Boeing models they are finished.

RR also hold the lead on the A330 and seem unlikely to lose it but that, too, is a programme that is running out of time. The promise of RR's de facto exclusivity on the A340 will never now be realised and the jury is still out on the A380. In other words, RR cannot bank on continuing robust sales on Airbus widebodies to keep the money coming in.

PW have died a death in civil aviation and RR, who were looking quite strong just a few years ago, badly need another major application or two to ensure that the same fate doesn't await them. Enter the New A350/A370.

Might Airbus blow it again and might RR be pouring their money into a Toulouse citron? Of course, but it's a risk that RR have to take. But all investments are a gamble. If Airbus can come up with a plane of the appeal of the A320/A330 in the 787/777 market and if RR have secured pole position then a decade from now we'll be admiring their vision and foresight.

And can RR deliver? I'd say so. With zero Airbus market share to build on, RR pitched the Trent 700 against the CF6 and PW4000 and came out ahead of both.

Will RR sign up? Will Airbus have to beg them? Do they both need each other? Badly?! It seems a no-brainer to me.
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:26 pm

Hi PM!

Good point PM, very good point...it's the same to me, this is a no-brainer issue indeed!
regards
CV990, the Maserati of the skies!
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:35 pm

Quoting Abba (Reply 11):
The reason why SQ might have been so keen on not simply order the 787 rather than the old 350 could well be because the 787 is simply too small for them. I expect that they are now most likely looking for a program to replace their 777s.

Doesn't anybody here remember the 787-10? It has the same chance of being launched and the NNNG A350 and is widely considered and 772 killer. So how could a plane that will replace the 772 be too small for SQ? And SQ has not even asked about replacing their 772s, since 773ER are still coming.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:44 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
If Airbus can't secure a commitment from at least one engine manufacturer to develop an engine to suit the proposed performance/weight/drag characteristics of the new design, surely the new Airbus model will be still-born?



Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 14):
So I agree with NAV20 that the engines are the critical weakness in the Airbus proposal, as well as a couple of others related to timing and market segment. Airbus could secure an engine manufacturer by offering engine development money



Quoting PM (Reply 16):
Will RR sign up?

Without a commitment from engine manufacturers, the programme won't be born at all, never mind still-born.
My understanding was that RR have either already signed an MOU to develop an engine for the new model, or are just about to, and that the Alliance are proposing a development of the GP7000, incorporating GEnx technology.

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...+bid+to+power+revamped+Airbus.html

http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...+Rolls-Royce+big+engine+prize.html

I'm pretty sure the new model WILL have engines  Smile.

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
My understanding is that SQ require a 787(8/9) capacity aircraft, have been shown the 370 and deemed it too big. An SQ 787 order is not too far away IMO.

Quote "Singapore Airlines Chief Executive Chew Choon Seng, one of the two vocal critics of the original A350, said last week that based on what he knew of Airbus's revised plans, the new jetliner "would make them much more competitive against the 787."

Although I certainly have no information on this point, the two comments do not seem to be compatible to me, Dale.

Regards
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 5:55 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 3):
GE is 'hesitating', RR is 'in talks', the position of P & W is 'unclear'......

Didn't Flight International report RR and Airbus were close to signing a MoU on a new 95,000 lbs engine only last week?

RR is a given fact on this project.

P&W would better board ship too, if they want to remain of any significance in the higher thrust regions.

GE is in a difficult position really: they are reported to be far stretched both financially and technically with their GEnx, so maybe they are just not in a position to step in right now. Besides, they have exclusivity on the 773, so they will certainly not make the opening move for a program which will take the 777 out of the game. On the other hand, once either one of the other engine manufacturers announces it will take up the challenge to build the all new engine, they might as well step in the race too, hoping to conserve at least some of their market share and they have a good chance of doing that: several 773 customers will dump their planes for the new much more efficient Airbus, yet might want to stay loyal to GE and their engines which have served them well on the 777. Anyway, expect them to move as last: they will take a cautious wait-and-see approach.
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 6:48 pm

IMO, the "decisive utterance" regarding the relative merits of any nascent "newest all-new A350 (A370)" proposal will come from Mr. Udvar-Hazy of ILFC. Whether he's willing and able to make such a profound pronouncement as soon as Farnborough will be interesting indeed.
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
keesje
Posts: 8745
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:02 pm

Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
My understanding is that SQ require a 787(8/9) capacity aircraft, have been shown the 370 and deemed it too big. An SQ 787 order is not too far away IMO.

Given SQ product / brand specification & route network I think they would not consider 9 abreast on the 787.

Probably most of their new medium aircraft would be two class. How many people would fit in a 787-9 long haul? (8 abreast economy, 32-34 inch pitch, 30-36 seats business 6 abreast 57-60 inch pitch.)

Their long haul 772ER's with this specification have 285 seats
http://www.seatguru.com/airlines/Sin...Singapore_Air_Boeing_777-200_3.php
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:04 pm

Airbus's A350 rethink splits customer opinion, with delays concerning Yemania as Finnair takes a relaxed view

Airlines with Airbus A350s on order have given a mixed response to the proposal to relaunch the aircraft with a raft of major improvements that will delay its entry into service by several years.


http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...ng+Yemania+as+Finnair+takes+a.html
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1577
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:07 pm

I think you guys are missing the point about the engines, or at least I did not explain my point clearly enough.

There would be no 787 without the new engines from RR and GE. Why because it is the engines which produce the greatest increment in efficiency gains. The engines were not developed in response to the 787 airframe, the airframe was developed in response to the new engine technology.
Boeing could see what was happening in the engine development field and developed an airframe to exploit the potential of the engines and then some.

In contrast, Airbus are saying this is the airframe we feel we need to produce, how about you develop an appropriate engine for it. Inevitabley under these circumstances and because of entry into service constraints, and the thrust requirements to match the performance of the 777, the 370 engines are going to be derivatives of a technology which predates the 787 engine technology.I cannot see RR or GE developing a whole new family of engines when they already have engines in the same thrust category. Engine Alliance developments of their 380 engines will be a compomise.

What segment is this 370 aimimg for. The 777 has already accounted for over 800 sales in its segment of the market, and the 787 will obviously outperfrm the 370 in the segment below 777 size. Ultimate performance ala 777LR and 345, are niche markets at best, with 2 players in their already, so why strangulate the 370 with the structural requirements to go out to that market.

In my opinion the sensible, relatively cheap, timely solution is to put the proposed weight saving (what is it 6 tonnes?) of the 350 into the 330 empty weight without increasing its MTOW, (330 Lite) possibly with Gen-X engines. This should have killer economics, and possibly provide a shortened even lighter and lower MTOW version also. This should cover a significant share of the 787 market and the shortened version could be offered as a 300/306 replacement. The proposed 350 could remain, hold its existing customers and provide significant compatability with the 330 Lite.

Ruscoe
 
User avatar
distanthorizon
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:48 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:07 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 8):
My point is that engines cost money to develop, all same airframes. I'm equally sure that one or other of the engine manufacturers will sign up - provided that Airbus pays for the development work.

Don't you ever know when to stop? It's getting ridiculous.  Yeah sure
Regards
Nelson SE
 
User avatar
Aloha717200
Posts: 3738
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:50 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:07 pm

Do we have any images of the A370 yet?
 
astuteman
Posts: 6341
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:27 pm

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 24):
There would be no 787 without the new engines from RR and GE. Why because it is the engines which produce the greatest increment in efficiency gains

No disputing that.

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 24):
The engines were not developed in response to the 787 airframe, the airframe was developed in response to the new engine technology.

I've no doubt that all 3 manufacturers talk routinely to the airframers, but I just can't believe that GE said - hey, let's make a next generation 65 000lb - 75 000 lb thrust engine and call it GEnx, at exactly the same time as RR said, hey, let's make a next generation 65 000lb - 75 000 lb thrust engine and call it Trent 1000, and Boeing then came along and said "Bugger me, we can make a cracking plane with these engines - let's give it a go".....

GEnx and Trent 1000 have come into existence expressly from a demand by Boeing to meet the incredibly high targets set by the 787 programme. Boeing have forced the engine makers to put their technological money where their mouth is, not the other way around.


If you made the same comment about the 747-8, though, I would agree with you completely  Smile

Regards
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:32 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 21):
IMO, the "decisive utterance" regarding the relative merits of any nascent "newest all-new A350 (A370)" proposal will come from Mr. Udvar-Hazy of ILFC. Whether he's willing and able to make such a profound pronouncement as soon as Farnborough will be interesting indeed.

Well, I wouldn't go as far as to give one person the task to speak on behalf of an entire community. It is not because he was the first one to say what many others thought too, that he can now speak for them again on the newly designed A350 soon to be unveiled.

Remember there were 2 schools: those who saw the A350 as an improved A330 and found it more than okay the way it looked, and those who had hoped the A350 would be all the 787 could not give them and were more than disappointed by it. Mr. Udvar-Hazy spoke on behalf of all these the first time around because it was actually quite easy and logic for him to do, but in fact, under the cover of this group are hidden many various and very different needs: some just needed a WIDER plane similar to the 787 cross section to lower its CASM, others needed a plane with more capacity than the largest 787 to replace their 772s with it, some others wanted more range to get rid of their A343s, some others hoped the A350 could morph into an A346/773 replacement....

Looking at the above list (787,777,A343, A346,) it is clear the A350 can't do it all, so I don't think Mr. Udvar-Hazy will be very keen on the task you repeatedly try to give him, since it is actually uncommon for a CEO of a leasing firm to publicly speak out on a certain product: his task is to stay neutral to both manufacturers and keep a profile as low as possible. At best, I think we could expect something along the lines of: "We've been informed about the revised offering from Airbus and we will certainly consider it for our future needs as it seems to fit them".

Airline CEO's however will be more likely to speak out more clearly since they can concentrate more on their own needs and it seems SQ's CEO is not waiting till he has seen all of the newly designed A350 to give it an intermediate thumbs up.

[Edited 2006-06-13 12:41:23]
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 412
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:41 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 22):
Given SQ product / brand specification & route network I think they would not consider 9 abreast on the 787.

Indeed, Airbus going for the 'Perfect Nine' market would make some sense.
I still wonder about the long term implications of Boeing's putative fuselage technology leadership (as this can only be ascertained when Airbus has fully comitted and detailed their new widebody) as well as product strategy.

The answer to your question, not omitting the 787-10 (780 or 781?), would be interesting. Competition is heating up, wish there was a third widebody manufacturer.
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:43 pm

@ NAV20

i had to read your following post twice to be really sure that you mean it like you wrote it:

"My point is that engines cost money to develop, all same airframes. I'm equally sure that one or other of the engine manufacturers will sign up - provided that Airbus pays for the development work."

That is a very nice idea.Let Airbus pay for the engine development.Ok, it would be the first time ever, but why not...The opposite is sometimes the reality: the engine producers pay for exclusive deals like RR for the A340NG and GE for the B777NG.

As the engines are returning more than their development costs during their lifetime due to very expensive spareparts - i would be ridiculous to let the airplane-producer pay for their development...

Johnny
 
scouseflyer
Posts: 2165
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 7:53 pm

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 29):
The answer to your question, not omitting the 787-10 (780 or 781?), would be interesting. Competition is heating up, wish there was a third widebody manufacturer.

Give it 10 years and Japan (and possibly China) will have it's own airliner industry.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:05 pm

Quoting Johnny (Reply 30):
i had to read your following post twice to be really sure that you mean it like you wrote it:

Don't see why, Johnny - I phrased it as simply as I could, sorry if you still found it too complicated.  Smile

Engine manufacturers only make money on new engines if the aeroplanes they develop them for sell. The engine manufacturers have recently spent money (their own, one assumes) on developing engines for the A380 (sales stalled), A340 upgrades (dead on arrival), and the A350 (cancelled).

On the other side of the balance sheet they're looking at solid sales of the engines they developed for the 777 and 787, on the basis of orders already on Boeing's books.

Now they're being asked to develop yet another new engine for yet another Airbus 'better mousetrap'. Which may or may not get built, and may or may not sell - and won't, in any case, be on the market before 2012 at the earliest.

It isn't me that's saying that the engine manufacturers are playing hard to get, it's the Wall Street Journal. I don't think that it's beyond the bounds of possibility that they will this time ask Airbus to put their own money where their mouth is. Indeed, it's downright probable.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
n1786b
Posts: 384
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 6:10 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:18 pm

It makes me believe that the A340 is dead - maybe some incremental improvements and follow on orders but that's about it.

It makes me believe the A330 is now the "interim capacity" plane until the A370 arrives.

It makes me wonder about the A380 program a bit - not if it was the right thing to do or if it will one day be a white elephant or King of the Hill - but rather how it has been eclipsed by the 787/A350/A370 programs - especially with the latest news about further delays, no more fuselages being shipped by land since April, cut cables, and the wake turbulence issue as well.

It make me wonder how does all this affect their A32X replacement program.

It make me wonder how Boeing will react with the 787/777 and Y3.

Pass the popcorn - this is going to be fun to watch!  hyper   bouncy 

- n1786b
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:22 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 28):
Airline CEO's however will be more likely to speak out more clearly since they can concentrate more on their own needs and it seems SQ's CEO is not waiting till he has seen all of the newly designed A350 to give it an intermediate thumbs up.

We'll soon see whether SQ, EK, and other major players make a decision in this category before Mr. Udvar-Hazy "utters." Personally, I wouldn't bet on it.
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
trex8
Posts: 4599
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:28 pm

did some people here miss this? besides those who seem to have selective memory
http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...-R+primed+to+power+new+‘A370’.html
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:37 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 32):
It isn't me that's saying that the engine manufacturers are playing hard to get, it's the Wall Street Journal.

Where does the article say that?

All I can find is:

Quoting Douwd20 (Thread starter):
Rolls-Royce is in talks with Airbus.

RR in TALKS means HARD TO GET for you?

"Boeing in talk of XXX 787" means "Boeing is having difficulties in selling 787s" too then?

I agree GE will not be eager to step in for reasons well known (GE-90 773 exclusivity), but you all to happily seem to be putting GE in the same basket with RR.

Rather than focus on who might not be willing to take the opportunity, let's concentrate on just how likely it is at least one engine supplier will step on board: RR.
After all, this is a discussion about the A350 and Airbus only needs ONE manufacturer to make their new A350 fly, whereas others must apparently hope all 3 will refuse to take up the challenge in order for it not to fly.
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 8:55 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 16):
Might Airbus blow it again and might RR be pouring their money into a Toulouse citron? Of course, but it's a risk that RR have to take. But all investments are a gamble. If Airbus can come up with a plane of the appeal of the A320/A330 in the 787/777 market and if RR have secured pole position then a decade from now we'll be admiring their vision and foresight.

I fully agree that RR will jump into this program, and will be happy if GE doesn't jump into it. As for competitiveness with the 787, I think it will only be so against the 787-10, but only because it will offer C market range at hopefully a lower cost than the 772LR. But the the 787-10 will be good for a large percentage of missions, so it will sell well, just like the A333 did, but unlike the A333 it will likely sell better than the competing higher ranged aircraft because the -10 will cover A and B markets.

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 19):
Quote "Singapore Airlines Chief Executive Chew Choon Seng, one of the two vocal critics of the original A350, said last week that based on what he knew of Airbus's revised plans, the new jetliner "would make them much more competitive against the 787."

Although I certainly have no information on this point, the two comments do not seem to be compatible to me, Dale.

There will be overlap with at least the 787-10, and I expect a heavier A370 to offer more range than the current 787-10 proposal. But I am skeptical that this aircraft will go down all the way to the 787-9 level, at least when it is configured with 8Y. 9Y 787-9s will partially overlap with 8Y 787-10s though. I think SQ is interested in that capability of the -9.

Still, it's really hard to predict what is going to happen because of the capacity flexibility of the 787, and its absorption of A market capabilities through greater efficiency and lower OEW than existing A market aircraft, while still offering B anda also C market range for a portion of the product line.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 9:34 pm

@NAV20

HAHA. I am still smiling about your idea to let Airbus pay for engine development.That is so absurd.You are in fact the comedian on this site.No question.

I cannot wait to read some more posts of you.

Johnny  Smile
 
dalecary
Posts: 834
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2000 10:28 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 9:34 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 19):
Quoting Dalecary (Reply 6):
My understanding is that SQ require a 787(8/9) capacity aircraft, have been shown the 370 and deemed it too big. An SQ 787 order is not too far away IMO.

Quote "Singapore Airlines Chief Executive Chew Choon Seng, one of the two vocal critics of the original A350, said last week that based on what he knew of Airbus's revised plans, the new jetliner "would make them much more competitive against the 787."

Although I certainly have no information on this point, the two comments do not seem to be compatible to me, Dale.

Fair enough, I can see the incompatibility. I am fairly sure the SQ RFP includes some 788s and majority 789s from Boeing. The 370 has been overlooked by SQ, is what I have been told. "Much more competitive"doesn't mean as good as, though. I'll be very surprised to see SQ go with the 370. It could happen, I just don't think it will.
 
Airportgal
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 2:23 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 9:58 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 27):
Boeing then came along and said "Bugger me, we can make a cracking plane with these engines - let's give it a go".....

while I wouldn't have phrased it quite as colorfully, I was thinking the same thing.....  Wink
 
CM767
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:58 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:22 pm

In my opinion there would be a market for the 370 engines, could efficiencies obtained be applied to the 777 or even Y3? This raises another issue; even if the 370 offer better economics than the 777, down the road Boeing could respond with limited R&D and probably offer a competitive product. My fear is that A is building a 777 with toady's technology and yes it could be a better plane than the 777, but still it will not be a competitor to the 787, as soon as Y3 is launched the 370 could be obsolete.

Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 24):
In my opinion the sensible, relatively cheap, timely solution is to put the proposed weight saving (what is it 6 tonnes?) of the 350 into the 330 empty weight without increasing its MTOW, (330 Lite) possibly with Gen-X engines. This should have killer economics, and possibly provide a shortened even lighter and lower MTOW version also. This should cover a significant share of the 787 market and the shortened version could be offered as a 300/306 replacement. The proposed 350 could remain, hold its existing customers and provide significant compatibility with the 330 Lite.

 checkmark   checkmark 

I agree 100% on this. I strongly believe that Airbus should update the 330 and focus on R&D on developing a superior narrow body replacement, I know that this is simplifying the issue, but I believe that Airbus could gain enough know how developing it with new technologies ( lighter materials) since developing a smaller plane could be cheaper and less complex. This strategy as a stepping stone could help Airbus latter on regain the wide body market and ensure that they maintain the leadership on the narrow body market.
But The Best Thing God Has Created Is A New Day
 
abba
Posts: 1380
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 12:08 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:56 pm

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 18):
Doesn't anybody here remember the 787-10? It has the same chance of being launched and the NNNG A350 and is widely considered and 772 killer. So how could a plane that will replace the 772 be too small for SQ? And SQ has not even asked about replacing their 772s, since 773ER are still coming.

I believe that SQ might only want the 10 and has therefore been dragging their feet with the 787 so far as the -10 hasn't been offered as of yet. However, I will guess that they will prefere a plane that can also later be used to re-place the -300. The 350 might do that.

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

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 10:57 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 15):
Maybe a B789/A370 mix? A330/B777 proved a winning team with many airlines.

A very good point. There are some routes, even for SQ, that are simply too thin for an aircraft the size of the 777. If the A-370 (?) is in that 777-300 size, you may see an order for both types (787-8 & A-370).

Quoting CM767 (Reply 41):
even if the 370 offer better economics than the 777, down the road Boeing could respond with limited R&D and probably offer a competitive product. My fear is that A is building a 777 with toady's technology and yes it could be a better plane than the 777, but still it will not be a competitor to the 787, as soon as Y3 is launched the 370 could be obsolete.

This is the danger for every aircraft and engine manufacturer; if the A-370 is not an all composite airliner with vastly improved economics due to a greatly reduced weight IN ADDITION TO the improved engines, all Boeing may have to do is adapt 787 technology to the 777 airframe and the A-370 may be in trouble.

The problem is that the 787's composite fuselage technology has the potential to radically change the weight/fuel game for every widebody airframe made. It will eventually work it's way into the 777 sized family. If it can be applied to the 747 size aircraft in the future, look out!!
One Nation Under God
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:03 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 32):
Quoting Johnny (Reply 30):
i had to read your following post twice to be really sure that you mean it like you wrote it:

Don't see why, Johnny - I phrased it as simply as I could, sorry if you still found it too complicated.

Engine manufacturers only make money on new engines if the aeroplanes they develop them for sell. The engine manufacturers have recently spent money (their own, one assumes) on developing engines for the A380 (sales stalled), A340 upgrades (dead on arrival), and the A350 (cancelled).

On the other side of the balance sheet they're looking at solid sales of the engines they developed for the 777 and 787, on the basis of orders already on Boeing's books.

Now they're being asked to develop yet another new engine for yet another Airbus 'better mousetrap'. Which may or may not get built, and may or may not sell - and won't, in any case, be on the market before 2012 at the earliest.

It isn't me that's saying that the engine manufacturers are playing hard to get, it's the Wall Street Journal. I don't think that it's beyond the bounds of possibility that they will this time ask Airbus to put their own money where their mouth is. Indeed, it's downright probable.

The entire production amounts to a game of musical chairs with dollars. Each firm closer to the source will do everything it can to shift costs to the smaller component manufacturer. There's also a lot of money involved in getting your product placed on the engine-these decisions are made by who ponies up the most cash, not necessarily who has the better engineered product.

When I worked for Delavan, the goal was always to get their product placed on large engines. It was costing Delavan-costing them-$1,250 for every RB211 fuel nozzle they sold. When they lined up the fuel manifolding contract for the Trent on the A380, they had to front a lot of development money to Rolls for the privilege.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:24 pm

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 43):
All Boeing may have to do is adapt 787 technology to the 777 airframe and the A-370 may be in trouble.

Any idea just how you adapt 787 technology to the 777?
Does that mean re-winging the 777 to give it an all composite wing just like the A350/787 is said to be getting and re-fuselaging it (does that word even exist?) by building an all composite 777 fuselage? Add new engines to that and you are basically saying 'all' Boeing needs to do is to build Y3.... in a time frame when they were planning on working on Y1 and let the 777 enjoy its supremacy....
 
Ken777
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:40 pm

Engine makers are in the same boat as A & B. The larger planes look good from a marketing point of view, but heavy users of the 737 and 320 are wanting THEIR next generation planes - especially with the problems of high fuel prices.

Boeing has already noted that the 787 was developed under a "joint technology pool" and it would be odd if at least one engine maker wasn't doing the same - at least to the degree they can.

With the 370 the engine companies are going to be looking at the resources required to take care of Airbus, but I don't see them putting themselves in a position where they are cur short on the NG single aisle side. That might limit the number of OEMs and/or amount of resources (read experienced engineers) that will be committed to a 370 program. For me it is simply the potential sales volume of NG single aisle planes that will impact their decision more than anyting else.
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2788
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:44 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 16):
Will RR sign up? Will Airbus have to beg them? Do they both need each other? Badly?! It seems a no-brainer to me.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 45):
Any idea just how you adapt 787 technology to the 777?

I have heard of the possibility of using lighter materials before and after the wingbox, and 787 uprated engines. A new wing would make a -400 possible too.

But why not just take two years and build Y3 and milk the 748 and 773 in the mean time?
Dont take life too seriously because you will never get out of it alive - Bugs Bunny
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1509
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Tue Jun 13, 2006 11:57 pm

I'm finding that folks are getting so passionate about nothing. What do we know about the A370? Nothing really. It's an idea, right now an Airbus dream and its not even a paper plane...So what's all this fuss about nothing? Can we just wait till Airbus at least, announce the bird before we go on this tangents about nothing?

All we have is media speculation... We dont have technical information so commenting on that can be to premature.

What we can comment is the business strategy...

IMO, I think Airbus is continuing to target the larger long haul planes w/o adequately addressing the medium sized jets. I hope they dont lose focus on the A300, A332, A333, A343, 762, 763, 764, and 772. This is where the majority of sales have been in the past and will continue into the future.

The 773ER is successful but its a smaller market... its been on sale for about 5 years... and its manged to sell 206 copies. Is this the market Airbus is fighting for? 206 frames in 5 years or so? In ten years, the 772x sold 581.

I think Airbus is being very foolish and avoiding the real problem and that is matching the 787 performance. This should be done with an all new Airbus plane.

Look, there is no doubt the A346 needs replacing but I believe they need to concentrate are the bigger slice of the pie and not planes that are > 370 passengers.
Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: WSJ: Airbus A370 Updates

Wed Jun 14, 2006 12:02 am

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 47):
I have heard of the possibility of using lighter materials before and after the wingbox, and 787 uprated engines. A new wing would make a -400 possible too.

Basically do an A350 to the 777?

I think Airbus just found out the hard way you can't effectively compete against an all new product just like that and I am pretty much convinced Boeing has learned that too from their past mishap with the 767-400ER.

Quoting DeltaDC9 (Reply 47):
Why not just take two years and build Y3 and milk the 748 and 773 in the mean time?

Well I don't know if there is much milk in the 748 actually?
It is significant to note the launch customer for the pax version is a VIP customer for a single plane!
Anyway, I'd assume Y3 would take more than just 2 years to design and build as as Ken777 rightfully said:

Quoting Ken777 (Reply 46):
users of the 737 and 320 are wanting THEIR next generation planes - especially with the problems of high fuel prices.