User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 3806
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:35 pm

Sheikh Ahmed bin Saeed al-Maktoum Chairman of Emirates has spoken in an interview that they will require 6 months to 1 year before they make a decision as to which model they will order between the A350XWB and B787. He also stated that they will require 70 to 100 frames and that the order will not be split between OEMs.

``We're looking at the A350 and the 787, about 70 to 100 aircraft,'' said Al Maktoum in an interview. ``We need at least six months to a year to decide, when we have all the data.''

In addition GE have confirmed that they have been in constant talks with EK and will not offer a powerplant for the A350-1000, at this stage;

``We've been in active talks and remain in conversations with them about powering the A350-800 and A350-900,'' said Scott Donnelly, chief executive officer of GE Aircraft Engines, in an interview today at the show. ``The A350-1000 we said we're not going to power.''

However EK would prefer at least 2 suppliers

Al Maktoum said he preferred a choice of engines. ``We'll always be very satisfied to see more than one engine manufacturer on any aircraft we buy,'' he said.

Quotes are fair use excerpt from http://www.bloomberg.com the article will be available under a search on their site.

It would appear that EK are going to take their time well and proper on this decision which was implied by Mr Clark and Mr Flannagen prior to the airshow.

Regards, PanAm_DC10
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
okelleynyc
Posts: 205
Joined: Fri Feb 24, 2006 10:26 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:47 pm

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Thread starter):
In addition GE have confirmed that they have been in constant talks with EK and will not offer a powerplant for the A350-1000, at this stage;

Interesting PanAm, I guess RR will be moving forward on their proposed 3-shaft design after all.
Just give me my Vario, my Ozone Mojo and a gorgeous day of soaring.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 1:52 pm

I think it's likely that Emirates Airways will order the A350XWB-900, not the -1000 model. The reason is simple: EK will have a substantial new fleet of 777-300ER's.
 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 3806
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:37 pm

Too late to dite my original post's link but here is a direct link to the article;

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...=conews&tkr=BA:US&sid=aHV3keoqsmMc

Regards, PanAm_DC10
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 3:52 pm

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Reply 3):
Too late to dite my original post's link but here is a direct link to the article;

http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news...qsmMc

Hi PanAm_DC10..thanks for the link. Smile

I think EK will wait until Boeing comes out with the final numbers for the 787-10 and the industrial launch for the A350.....

If Boeing's Bair is to believed, the 787-10 might be a possible good choice with EK..as they have been on record a number of times stating that the -10 would be a great plane...

"Bair reconfirmed that Boeing is proceeding with the 787-10, telling media that it is a case of "when and not if" the stretch will proceed and "the economics were almost unbelievable." The current design specification for the dash 10 in a typical three-class configuration with eight-across seating is around 300, with trade studies to determine final range/payload. Current range is 7,500 nm. but he suggested it may increase by 200 nm."

source:atwonline.com
"Up the Irons!"
 
atmx2000
Posts: 4301
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 4:24 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:02 pm

Wow, I didn't see that coming.  sarcastic 
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:28 pm

I'm confident "al-Maktoum's Brain," Mr. Clark, will have something to say about the A350XWB proposal in short order. I'm a little surprised he hasn't already whispered in Geoff Thomas's ear.  Smile
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
User avatar
PanAm_DC10
Crew
Topic Author
Posts: 3806
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2000 7:37 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 4:37 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 6):
I'm a little surprised he hasn't already whispered in Geoff Thomas's ear

Respectfully, I believe he may have already done so, given the esteemed Mr Geoff Thomas was one of the very few journalists to state that he didn't expect a decision by EK on these models at Farnborough  Wink

Regards, PanAm_DC10
Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:23 pm

In itself, the 787-10 would certainly be a very good choice for EK or in fact for any airline which looks at an efficient long haul twin seating around 300 pax.

However, in this specific case, and although Emirates have been pushing Boeing extremely hard to actually launch this highly efficient stretched version of the 787, it looks to me like the 787-10 will come out as the lesser plane against the A350XWB-900 in EK's eyes.

To start with, the 787-10 does not offer the range the A350XWB offers Emirates.
On top of this significant performance disadvantage, the 787-10 also comes with a 5 inch narrower cabin: since EK will certainly go for a 9 abreast configuration in Y class, this comfort issue will play in the minds of the Emirates executives.

Also, looking beyond the individual differences of both planes, the 787-10 is having a serious handicap due to the fact that contrary to the A350XWB, it doesn't give EK the possibility to replace their big fleet of 777-300ERs with something much more efficient in a not to distant future. Sure, the 777-300ER has been and still is a very efficient plane, but Boeing itself -and now also Airbus- have shown it can be beaten in efficiency rather easily by clean sheet designs. Will EK just wait till Boeing decides they have milked their 777 enough for it to be replaced by something all new? Or will they go for the A350XWB-1000 before that, making use of the most efficient plane as soon as it becomes available to the market, regardless of who produces it? A look at the companies history will easily answer this question for you.
The fact the A350XWB would allow EK to make a choice for 1 type of plane for ALL their needs below the A380, rather than for a mixed fleet of initially 787/777 and then most likely 787/A350XWB later on and you have the reasons why I think the 787 has just lost EK as a customer.

The slightly bigger A350XWB looks tailor-made for airlines which only need the 787-9/-10 as well as the 773 because even if it only matches the efficiency levels of the 787, it does offer them the chance to make huge efficiency gains by also replacing their fleet of 773s right away, iso having to wait till Boeing offers them something completely new in this category many years later.
 
cartoonranger
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 11:47 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:28 pm

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Thread starter):
Al Maktoum said he preferred a choice of engines. ``We'll always be very satisfied to see more than one engine manufacturer on any aircraft we buy,'' he said.

This is quite an interesting point as EK seemed to set out on an RR crusade when they first started to ramp up expansion. Then after the problems with the trent 800's, they appeared to change tact and all the big orders suddenly appeared for GE (or Engine Alliance) powered frames. Of course there wasn't always a choice but by the looks of things, engine competition for new EK aeroplanes is about to get very hot

CR
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:40 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
The slightly bigger A350XWB looks tailor-made for airlines which only need the 787-9/-10 as well as the 773 because even if it only matches the efficiency levels of the 787, it does offer them the chance to make huge efficiency gains by also replacing their fleet of 773s right away

You are basing your assessment on the 2006 picture. Try to propel your mind to 2015. How will the 773 have evolved until then? How far will EIS of the Y3 be away by then, and what will the level of technology be? Which airlines will be around by then?

While the A350XWB at EIS might still have a metallic fuselage and Airbus' 1st CFRP wing design, the Y3 may be on the verge to introduce the 3rd incarnation of a CFRP fuselage and the 4th or 5th commercial CFRP wing design.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6346
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:41 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
To start with, the 787-10 does not offer the range the A350XWB offers Emirates.
On top of this significant performance disadvantage, the 787-10 also comes with a 5 inch narrower cabin: since EK will certainly go for a 9 abreast configuration in Y class, this comfort issue will play in the minds of the Emirates executives.

IIRC Emirates specifically said they wanted a 300+ seater with a range of 8300Nm+

Regards
 
gunsontheroof
Posts: 3226
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 8:30 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 5:54 pm

Considering the young age of their B777/A340 fleet, I'd be very surprised to see EK go with the new A350. This isn't to say that the A350 hasn't improved, I just think the smaller 787 is going to make more sense for the EK fleet. Time, as they say, will tell.
 
SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:15 pm

Interesting news out of Emirates.

We do not have any clear figures out for the 787-10X yet do we? (or proper figures for the A350 really apart from Leahy's presentation).
Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:18 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
To start with, the 787-10 does not offer the range the A350XWB offers Emirates.

The full range spectrum for the A350XWB has not been presented. Only the base range of 8500nm and I believe that is for the A350XWB-800.

Anyone else think that writing out A350XWB-800 is just too much. We all know it is the new version of the A350. There is nothing but the XWB. Can we just call it the A358, A359, A3510?
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
SeJoWa
Posts: 419
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:11 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:49 pm

Quoting Centrair (Reply 14):
Anyone else think that writing out A350XWB-800 is just too much. We all know it is the new version of the A350. There is nothing but the XWB. Can we just call it the A358, A359, A3510?

It looks like Airbus begs to differ:

http://www.wagna.net/temp/Airbus%20A280%20FT%20ad%20-%202006-07-19.gif
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 6:56 pm

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 12):
Considering the young age of their B777/A340 fleet, I'd be very surprised to see EK go with the new A350. This isn't to say that the A350 hasn't improved, I just think the smaller 787 is going to make more sense for the EK fleet

Sure, the 777-300ER is relatively new, but why would that keep them from dumping these planes? EK is currently negotiating ways to cancel an order for 20 A340-600 which haven't even been built, because the 777-300ER is 8 to 10 % more fuel efficient. Imagine their reaction if indeed the A350-1000 beats the 777-3ER by a whopping 25%!

EK has said they ONLY want the 787-10, which is the biggest version of the plane and they are NOT interested in the smaller versions. In fact, EK sees the 787 not as the 767 replacement it is intended to be, but as a real 777-200 successor (something Boeing didn't really entirely optimize the 787 for) and I dare to say they would most probably love to see it also as a 777-300 successor. Unfortunately for them, the specifications of the 787 are such it will always be set below the 777-3ER (probably to avoid eroding the lucrative market for their top product), but it now seems Airbus is making use of this strategy from Boeing to make their A350XWB sit right in between the very modern 787 and the not so modern anymore 777, in an effort to make a single and very attractive plane for all those who plan to operate both the bigger 787 versions AND the 777. If Airbus can match the 787 efficiency and beat the 777 efficiency by a large margin, then it will proof to be much cheaper to go only A350XWB than to go 787/777 combo.

Will Airbus loose out on the low end to the 787-8 and more importantly the 787-3 with this strategy? Most probably yes, but then this must not be a dramatic thing for them. Looking at their current product line, they have never had a 757 or 767-200 competitor and they have been doing fine over the last decade despite not selling much pax A300 or A310 either, so this market segment is really not that important to them prospering. You might come back and say the segment of the 787-8 alone (i.e. the 762/A310/757) is predicted to be about 1,500 planes and Airbus just hands all this to Boeing, but that is not a bad thing for them to do indeed, taking into account more than half of the market for those planes is with US based airlines which have a Boeing only policy, meaning Airbus can realistically only hope to win about 300 to 400 orders in this category: 350 or so sales in not really worth optimizing their A350 for, but the outlook of 1,150 (1,500 in case Airbus does not compete with them) sales did make a valid business case for Boeing to size the 787 somewhat smaller for: which is why in my point of view BOTH manufacturers have sized their plane perfectly, albeit each to match the needs of their potential customers only.

[Edited 2006-07-19 12:06:46]
 
boeing767-300
Posts: 621
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2001 11:23 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 9:41 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 16):
Sure, the 777-300ER is relatively new, but why would that keep them from dumping these planes? EK is currently negotiating ways to cancel an order for 20 A340-600 which haven't even been built, because the 777-300ER is 8 to 10 % more fuel efficient. Imagine their reaction if indeed the A350-1000 beats the 777-3ER by a whopping 25%!

Unfortunately you are still in the "dream world" that you have been in since Leahy's slick presentation on the A350XWB. Unfortunately for Airbus the easiest part is Leahys and there are not many better in his field.

People like yourself will believe what they want to believe and quite frankly if you really believe that the A350??? is going to be 25% more efficient than 773ER then whatever you are smoking is good sh*t...... smile 

Your blind faith in Leahy's sales pitch is admirable but when the Airlines tire of all the gloss and promises and want the hard (contractual) figures from the engineering department rather than the sales department I believe you will find that Airbus is just a little desperate in their current situation and they know only too well they have to offer something superior to 787/777.

Whether they can do this remains to be seen. Whether they can make money on the programme given the EIS of 2012/3 and huge development costs also is in doubt. There are some fairly serious promises and make no mistake the A350XWB looks very good on paper and I stress the word paper because when the serious negotiations start with the Airlines the engineers will be left with the job of ensuring Airbus's credibility is not destroyed yet again.

One does not need to look too far back (2002) just prior to A346 launch. At this stage due to Leahy's spin etc etc everybody including even Boeing thought the 77W was in deep trouble before it even flew for the first airline.

The rest as they say is history and the A346 has turned out to be a relatively inefficient aircraft when compared to the 77W. There is no doubt that both Rolls Royce and Airbus disappointed in this project to the point 777 outsold A340 by 15 to 1 in 2005. The point is that airlines would look very skeptically at this proposal, they will watch very closely A380 performance EIS as well. Airbus need to be very sure that they can match or exceed promised performance because if they don't they will have shot their credibility and the A350 programme will fail.

Right now thy are promising the earth with technology that despite being 4/5 years later EIS is older than the composite fuselage 787. I believe the A350 will suffer the same fate as A346. It will weigh significantly more and therefore suffer in the fuel burn/efficiency department.

This is a very interesting time for Airbus and you can bet performance contracts/penalties will rate very high in any negotiations. The thing that really shadows all the Leahy gloss and bullshit is this..Singapore Airlines are very excited about the plans we have shown them........Yeah RIGHT!!!! they turned around and ordered 20 787 and if that does not send a clear message I don't know what does. Airbus have acknowledged to the Aviation world that the A340 is DEAD and Boeing got it right with the 777 in the early 1990s and really caught them with their pants down with the 787.

How does Leahy explain to Airlines we spent two years getting it completely wrong about A350 but now we have a 787/777 killer sketched up in two months...... go back to whatever you are smoking.....  scratchchin 

My prediction... EK are doing a QF for price and like QF this order will be pivotal to both A and B. If Boeing get the order then it is yet another large slap for Airbus and a few nails in the A350XWB coffin and if Airbus get it it is the just the start they need to restore credibility. This situation was made for the EK beancounters and will ensure EK get an awesome price.

Thats the way I see it... very interesting.. twocents 
 
centrair
Posts: 2845
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 3:44 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:00 pm

Quoting SeJoWa (Reply 15):
It looks like Airbus begs to differ:

That was great!
Yes...I am not a KIX fan. Let's Japanese Aviation!
 
airmailer
Posts: 478
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 4:28 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:01 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
On top of this significant performance disadvantage, the 787-10 also comes with a 5 inch narrower cabin

Ya'll must be really fat over there in europe to choose an aircraft because of an extra half inch of room per seat.

I hear on the news over here how fat Americans are becoming, but I have seen very few people in all of my travels that need more room than what comes in the coach section of a 737 (except for when I travel to Chicago, no offense to anyone there, that just happens to be my observation... maybe they're just passing through).

How much more drag is added to the aircraft by those extra 5 inches?
What is the added cost per seat of that .5 inch?

.... I mean does half an inch actually constitute the term Extra Wide?
or is it more like marginally wider?
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:08 pm

Interesting thoughts from EK. I think this will eventually go to Airbus as they generally favor that manufacturer (with the exception of the 777). If they really wanted the 787 they could and should have ordered it by now, especially after all the hubub Boeing did jumping through hoopes to do the 787-10 for them.
One Nation Under God
 
katekebo
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 12:02 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:38 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 16):
Imagine their reaction if indeed the A350-1000 beats the 777-3ER by a whopping 25%

Bear in mind that the 25% is an Airbus claim that has to be taken with a grain of salt, and is for sure based on seat configuration and mission profile that favor Airbus (typically Airbus uses higher seat densities than Boeing for such comparisons to make their CASM look better).

Now, EK is one of the few airlines that flies their B777 with 10-abreast in Economy, what increases the seat density by 11%. This would not be possible in the A350 (irrespective of the XWB denomination). Although in Airbus comparisons, with 9-abreast seating, the B777-300 and the A350-1000 look like same-size airplanes, EK is actually squeezing more seats in their B777 that they would be able to put on a A350. This already reduces the claimed CASM difference by approx. 10%.
 
airlineaddict
Posts: 308
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 12:37 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:42 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 11):
IIRC Emirates specifically said they wanted a 300+ seater with a range of 8300Nm+

 checkmark 

Because the 787-10 is engine limited until updated specs from the engine manufacturers are released, it would be premature for EK to announce an order. EK will only know what to order after the dust has settled on what type of engine RR and potentially GE will be offering for the A350-900XWB and whether that technology could be used on the 787-10.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 10:58 pm

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 16):
(something Boeing didn't really entirely optimize the 787 for) and I dare to say they would most probably love to see it also as a 777-300 successor.

maybe if you bothered to read what I wrote in reply 4, you would have possibly figured out that it was more than just the "baseline" 787's Boeing was going to have..  sarcastic 

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):

"Bair reconfirmed that Boeing is proceeding with the 787-10, telling media that it is a case of "when and not if" the stretch will proceed and "the economics were almost unbelievable."



Quoting AirMailer (Reply 19):
(except for when I travel to Chicago, no offense to anyone there, that just happens to be my observation... maybe they're just passing through).

lol...living in Chicago for 3 decades, I agree...but try flying to MCO, it gets bad there too..even worse!!!

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 20):
Interesting thoughts from EK. I think this will eventually go to Airbus as they generally favor that manufacturer (with the exception of the 777). If they really wanted the 787 they could and should have ordered it by now, especially after all the hubub Boeing did jumping through hoopes to do the 787-10 for them.

They just ordered a dozen 747-8's...EK will order the plane which fits their needs..if its the B787 then it shall be the B787, if its the A350, it will be the A350....simple as that.
"Up the Irons!"
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:25 pm

Quoting Boeing767-300 (Reply 17):
Unfortunately you are still in the "dream world"

I am? Rather than kicking around fairly strongly and wildly at all sort of things, you might actually show me wrong on any of the specific points I've brought up so I can wake up and smell the coffee.

The point I am trying to highlight is that after more than one year of pushing Boeing really hard, the 787-10 could FINALLY give EK a very efficient plane with the required seating capacity, but it still lacks over a 1,000NM of much needed range!
The A35XWB-900 however seems to match EK's need perfectly both in size and range as it is and at the same time it also looks like the bigger A350XWB-1000 could be a very efficient 777-3ER replacement for them, thus modernising, simplifying and seriously economizing their fleet by opting for one single plane rather than a 787/787 combo. Whether the savings will be 'only' 10 to 15% or the full 25% is important to calculate exactly how many billions they could save over time, but not in making up their mind to put the almost certain 787-10 launch order on hold since their might now be something available which is even better for the airline from a wider fleet perspective.

From the initial reaction EK now shows to the A350XWB, it seems they may think more along the lines of my personal analysis as described more in detail in reply 8 than they do along your lines really.
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8007
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:08 am

I think Airbus designed the A350XWB-900R specifically for two customers: Qatar Airways and Emirates Airways. With a still-air range of over 9,000 nautical miles, this specific model could fly to most of the world's destinations from Doha, Qatar and Dubai, UAE non-stop year-round. And Airbus could just convince Singapore Airlines to buy this model for the SIN-LAX/SFO and SIN-EWR routes, too.

One possibility is that Airbus maybe looking at a roomier two-class version of the A350XWB-900R specifically for Qantas Airways. This could make it possible to fly between LHR and SYD non-stop year-round for the first time, saving three or more hours off the LHR-SYD transit time.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 12:52 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 16):
Sure, the 777-300ER is relatively new, but why would that keep them from dumping these planes? EK is currently negotiating ways to cancel an order for 20 A340-600 which haven't even been built, because the 777-300ER is 8 to 10 % more fuel efficient.

You're forgetting the simple aspect of timing.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):
The point I am trying to highlight is that after more than one year of pushing Boeing really hard, the 787-10 could FINALLY give EK a very efficient plane with the required seating capacity, but it still lacks over a 1,000NM of much needed range!

Much needed range?

Let's dilute the 7,500 nm range of the current 787-10 to about 6,000-6,500 nm to account for payload variations, prevailing winds, and necessary margins, and the only areas beyond reach are the U.S. west coast and New Zealand.

When 2012 comes, Boeing will have a mature product with four years of in-service experience. Airbus will just be introducing the first A350 variant, and EK has the wonderful taste of their A388 delays and A346HGW fiasco in their mouths. There's more at work than just numbers thrown around at an airshow.

In fact, the best thing going for the A350 is still EK's lingering order for 20 A346HGW that they don't want.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):
The A35XWB-900 however seems to match EK's need perfectly both in size and range

Well duh. It's a paper airplane with no firm specifications that was drafted for explicitly for EK. It only took Airbus three years...

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):
at the same time it also looks like the bigger A350XWB-1000 could be a very efficient 777-3ER replacement for them, thus modernising, simplifying and seriously economizing their fleet by opting for one single plane rather than a 787/787 combo.

So you're assuming that Boeing is static in their ability to either update the 777 or further stretch the 787? What leads you to make that conclusion?

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):
Whether the savings will be 'only' 10 to 15% or the full 25% is important to calculate exactly how many billions they could save over time,

And people continue to throw around percentages and statistics without having a clue of what they pertain.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 24):
From the initial reaction EK now shows to the A350XWB, it seems they may think more along the lines of my personal analysis as described more in detail in reply 8 than they do along your lines really.

Show me anything that supports that conclusion. They gave Airbus years to develop a paper airplane and they won't wait 6 months for Boeing to respond in any manner?
 
boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:17 am

Quoting Boeing767-300 (Reply 17):

Welcome to my respected users list.

What makes everyone think EK is going A350XWB cause the range when EK has been consistently hit with delays and disappointments from Airbus for 2yrs strait now? What are they going to do... Push Boeing as they have to develop the 787-10 then have Boeing finalize it and then stab them in the back and go Airbus? Come on... Airbus's credibility is like a train wreck right now still. Leahy just added some more wax to it by presenting the A350XWB like he did. When it all wears off and SQ, QF, and EK are wanting their first A380's we will see how the orders start to fall in who's favor.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:40 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 27):
What makes everyone think EK is going A350XWB cause of range when EK has been consistently hit with delays and disappointments from Airbus for 2yrs strait now?

Because maybe in the end it is better to risk having to wait 6 months for a plane which actually does what you really want it to, than to get a plane delivered on time which falls sort of your needs for the rest of its life time?

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 27):
What are they going to do... Push Boeing as they have to develop the 787-10 then have Boeing finalize it and then stab them in the back and go Airbus?

They have been pushing BOTH manufacturers really hard to come up with an efficient new plane for them, capable of doing 8,300NM with roughly 300 seats: whoever can deliver them just that, will likely win EK, regardless how much effort the other manufacturer has put into making a competing product. So far the 787-10 has been making good progress, but is still falling short of the needs of EK, hence them making very positive general comments about the plane, but NOT actually launching it with a mega order.

[Edited 2006-07-19 18:43:35]
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 1:45 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
The current design specification for the dash 10 in a typical three-class configuration with eight-across seating is around 300, with trade studies to determine final range/payload. Current range is 7,500 nm. but he suggested it may increase by 200 nm."

As of today Airbus has the advantage, but once Boeing decides to put stronger engines and redesigns the landing gear, they could push the range up to where EK wants it to be.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
since EK will certainly go for a 9 abreast configuration in Y class, this comfort issue will play in the minds of the Emirates executives.

Comfort? Emirates? Dude, this is the airline that packs 10-abreast seating into a 777...

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 8):
Will EK just wait till Boeing decides they have milked their 777 enough for it to be replaced by something all new? Or will they go for the A350XWB-1000 before that, making use of the most efficient plane as soon as it becomes available to the market, regardless of who produces it?

Emirates wants the replacement for their 777-200ER. If they decide to replace their -300ERs, I can see them being a prime launch-customer candidate for yet-to-be-announced Boeing Yellowstone-3.

Quoting Centrair (Reply 14):
The full range spectrum for the A350XWB has not been presented. Only the base range of 8500nm and I believe that is for the A350XWB-800.

"The Mouth" presented that range for all three models of A350.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 16):
Imagine their reaction if indeed the A350-1000 beats the 777-3ER by a whopping 25%!

I'll believe it when I see it comming from the airlines. Realistically, I'd expect 15 - 18% savings over 777-300ER, 20% if Airbus really works on it.

Quoting Boeing767-300 (Reply 17):
How does Leahy explain to Airlines we spent two years getting it completely wrong about A350 but now we have a 787/777 killer sketched up in two months......

Same way Baseler explained Boeing going after A330-200 with 767-400: comming out with a brand new design. Which doesn't change the fact that Airbus should have done it two years ago.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26):
Well duh. It's a paper airplane with no firm specifications that was drafted for explicitly for EK.

So is 787-10.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:06 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 29):
Realistically, I'd expect 15 - 18% savings over 777-300ER, 20% if Airbus really works on it.

I think 18 to 20% would indeed be closer to the reality indeed, especially given the fact EK puts 10 abreast in the 777, thus giving their 773 a higher seat count.
Simply knocking off 10 percent like Katekebo did is a bit too much I suppose, because that would assume the entire plane is configured in Y class.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 29):
If they decide to replace their -300ERs, I can see them being a prime launch-customer candidate for yet-to-be-announced Boeing Yellowstone-3.

That is assuming the airline will stick to their 777-3ERs till they have had their entire live with them, by which time Boeing will be certainly ready to launch Y3.
However, with ever higher fuel prices, increasing international competition in the Gulf region and a plane on the drawing boards which could potentially knock off 18 percent of the CASM of the 777-3ER fleet (according to your own estimations) already half way down their useful life, I am not so sure EK will want to stick with these Boeing planes for almost another decade.

The timing of a new product is important if it only marginally improves efficiency of the planes it is supposed to replace. If however the new plane smashes all competitors in the market, it will bring the fleet renewal cycle forward and timing becomes less of an issue. If the A350XWB indeed does what it promises to do, then the 777 will suffer a premature end, just like the A330 has come to a premature end, half way down its cycle of life.

Maybe in today's high tech environment, new planes are no longer meant to be around 30 years or more, but rather 15 to 20 years at best?

[Edited 2006-07-19 19:10:51]
 
MEA-707
Posts: 3671
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 1999 4:51 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:18 am

With Emirates, Qatar and Etihad, plus all the Indian airlines growing and ordering like madmen, maybe Emirates has already found out the 777s and A380s which will arrive over the next 5 years are MORE then enough and use the confusion about the specifications to back out of ordering anything for a long time.... I am sure they can get the A-340-600s cancelled in a package deal promising they'll continuously support the A-380.
nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:18 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 29):
So is 787-10.

Not really... Boeing is in a much better position to offer firm specifications because the 787-10 is based upon an aircraft on the verge of entering production. Airbus doesn't have a fraction of the specifications Boeing has firmed for the 787.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 30):
I think 18 to 20% would indeed be closer to the reality indeed, especially given the fact EK puts 10 abreast in the 777, thus giving their 773 a higher seat count.

However, with ever higher fuel prices, increasing international competition in the Gulf region and a plane on the drawing boards which could potentially knock off 18 percent of the CASM of the 777-3ER fleet

You couldn't feasably knock 18% off the 773ER CASM. Just isn't going to happen. You could reduce fuel burn to that degree, but not CASM.

There are too many other variables (some like labor cost being fixed) to make such a drastic reduction. Note the 787-8. It will reduce fuel burn by 20% relative to the 763ER/A332, but CASM will only drop by about 12%.
 
787engineer
Posts: 545
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:08 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:24 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 30):
Maybe in today's high tech environment, new planes are no longer meant to be around 30 years or more, but rather 15 to 20 years at best?

Well EK recieved their first two 773ERs this year, one in February and another in March. They also have 26 more on order. Assuming a 15 year lifetime, that puts the retirement EKs first 773ER at 2021, by that time Y3 should have already entered service. IIRC, the A350XWB-1000 will carry 350 pax, while EK puts 380 seats in the 773 (3-class). So depending on seating config EK may put the A350-1000 as a separate smaller model
 
boeingfever777
Posts: 1990
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 1:35 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:24 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 28):
Because maybe in the end it is better to risk having to wait 6 months for a plane which actually does what you really want it to, than to get a plane delivered on time which falls sort of your needs for the rest of its life time?

Very true... 100% agree with you there. What is the 787-10 lacking that they are looking for?
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:29 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 30):
However, with ever higher fuel prices, increasing international competition in the Gulf region and a plane on the drawing boards which could potentially knock off 18 percent of the CASM of the 777-3ER fleet (according to your own estimations) already half way down their useful life, I am not so sure EK will want to stick with these Boeing planes for almost another decade.

Keep in mind, that Yellowstone-3 will have technology beyond the one we see in 787: probably more composite structure than 787 (closer to 65 - 70% vs. 50% in 787), bleedless engines and other improvements. If A350-1000 does give 25% savings over 777-300ER, then it will be very difficult for Boeing to beat it, unless they go to some unpractical, unconventional design like blended-wing body. The 15-18% I came up with was an educated guess based on "reality factor" given the history with Airbus designs in the last 10 years.

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 30):
Maybe in today's high tech environment, new planes are no longer meant to be around 30 years or more, but rather 15 to 20 years at best?

Actually, the composite aircraft are expected to last longer, due to the better wear and tear handling. Look at composite sailplanes: every single one built so far, except for the ones lost in crashes, is still flying, whereas the wooden and metal ones are getting scrapped after 25 - 30 years, because they are prone to faster material degradations and costly frequent airframe inspections. It's also quite possible that within next 10 - 15 years engine technology advancements would allow much cheaper reengine projects than the ones done today, as 787 will already be optimised for a "quick-swap" between Trent-1000 and GeNX.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
787engineer
Posts: 545
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 5:08 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:29 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 34):

Very true... 100% agree with you there. What is the 787-10 lacking that they are looking for?

Who knows, the 787-10 isn't much more of a "real" airplane than the A350XWB. Both are still very conceptual.
 
Johnny
Posts: 812
Joined: Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:38 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:30 am

Hmm, it is really strange, but EK seems to be unhappy with the B787, otherwise they would have ordered it already.

Now they want to compare it with the A350, which they are not sure about as well...What airplane are they looking at?!?

Looks for me like they will place additional A330 and B777-orders in the meantime.

Just my guess...  Smile
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:36 am

Quoting BoeingFever777 (Reply 34):
What is the 787-10 lacking that they are looking for?

EK wants 787-10 with 787-8 range. Now that Airbus has A350-900XWB, I find it highly unlikely that Boeing will not give them what they are asking for if they really want EK as a customer for 787-10.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
slz396
Posts: 1883
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2001 7:01 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:36 am

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 35):
composite aircraft are expected to last longer, due to the better wear and tear handling

Yes I know, but I didn't mean the individual plane, but rather the models, like 787, A330, A340, 777 etc.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:38 am

Quoting Johnny (Reply 37):
Hmm, it is really strange, but EK seems to be unhappy with the B787, otherwise they would have ordered it already.

No, they've simply been waiting to see what sort of aircraft Airbus will offer. Fleet planning requires very deliberte and long-term decisions. There's no reason for them to rush, and they are making a prudent choice to evaluate all of their options.

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 36):
Who knows, the 787-10 isn't much more of a "real" airplane than the A350XWB. Both are still very conceptual.

Again, I'll take issue with that. The 787 program is so much further along that Boeing does have actual numbers to work with.

Airbus can pick just about anything their customer(s) want to land a launch order. Airbus only formally announced their intention to persue this A350-XWB in May. The 787 program has proceeded without significant disruption since January 2003.

Not that the 787-10 is a firmed design, but to say that both aircraft are purely conceptual doesn't do the 787 justice.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 35):
Keep in mind, that Yellowstone-3 will have technology beyond the one we see in 787:

But for the time being, Y3 is so far off that EK can't consider it for fleet planning in the next decade.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8969
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:39 am

I'm not at all surprised that EK is waiting; Boeing, I would imagine, is pretty worried about this new aircraft. The good news for airlines is that even if the A350 isn't all its cracked up to be (e.g. the 25% over the 773), it is still a plausible competitor for the 787, which the old 350 never was and that means that Boeing is going to be pushed for ever steeper discounts; it can't really take the attitude that "we have enough so far, thanks", as there are some very important and winnable contests out there.

Airbus, for its part, needs to prove that it's back in the game with a serious product and given the turbulent r'ship between EK and Airbus recently, EK can really wring a top class deal out of them, with very good compensation promises for delays. Airbus can't afford to get this aircraft wrong and from what we're seeing so far, it looks great.

To my mind, Airbus has a leg up over Boeing for the following reasons:
- Airbus still has o/s A340-600 orders from EK, which it doesn't want, so the discounts can be worked into the deal;
- Airbus can offer EK a joint launch deal, on the A350-900 (and -1000 as well) AND the A380-900;
- The 787-10 is the biggest the 787 is going to get, so it is effectively "one aircraft", assuming EK isn't interested in the 789; the A350, however, has growth built in and thus, EK can chop and change between the models, including the -900L and freighter.
- Assuming EK will operate both types in a nine abreast layout, that extra few inches is attractive, from a pax comfort viewpoint.

This will be an extremely interesting competition; pity Airbus didn't get the 350 right "out of the box", or they might have stood a better chance in some recently announced deals.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:40 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 32):
Not really... Boeing is in a much better position to offer firm specifications because the 787-10 is based upon an aircraft on the verge of entering production.

Boeing is in much better position to offer a "simple stretch" with range-for-payload tradeoff a'la 777-300 (non -ER), not a competitive alternative to A350-900XWB, which will require reengineering to acommodate 8,500nm range requirement as demanded by EK.

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 36):
787-10 isn't much more of a "real" airplane than the A350XWB. Both are still very conceptual.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
DIA
Posts: 3053
Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2001 2:24 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:41 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 30):
If the A350XWB indeed does what it promises to do, then the 777 will suffer a premature end, just like the A330 has come to a premature end, half way down its cycle of life.

777 premature end? Not really. The 772LR/772F/773ER marching onward is not a premature end...let's not forget all the outstanding orders. As for the 772ER...yes...but that is ansewerd with the 787-10.

A330 halfway down its lifecycle? Not really...that damn thing is still pulling orders right and left...and probably will for a few more years. Remember, the A330 has now been flying since 1993...not really a premature end. Additionally, let's not forget the A330F is just getting going.

Now, on the other hand, if you are comparing these a/c to the 737's or A300's full-length lives...then, yes...they will probably meet a premature end, but only because technology is advancing so rapidly, and the world's economics along with it.
Ding! You are now free to keep supporting Frontier.
 
BlueSky1976
Posts: 1605
Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2004 9:18 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:47 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 40):
Airbus only formally announced their intention to persue this A350-XWB in May.

Allegedly, they have been working on it since they lost Qantas campaign ( January 2006). They couldn't announce anything without having solid data to back it up and 5 months is enough to have a preliminary product definition.
POLAND IS UNDER DICTATORSHIP. PLEASE SUPPORT COMMITTEE FOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY, K.O.D.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1459
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:50 am

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 10):
While the A350XWB at EIS might still have a metallic fuselage and Airbus' 1st CFRP wing design

Totally wrong, Airbus already have a fully CFRP designed & assembled wing, the A400 wing wich is just on production. They will base all experience of this program for further Wing designs and programs. Btw there are Al-Li alloys and other composites which are ligther then CFRP. But i think the fuselage will be a mix of diffrent materials.
Anyway i think the chances are 50/50 for 787 and a350 both have good things which would fit to EK 's plans. It will be a very interesting order.

[Edited 2006-07-19 19:57:59]
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
redflyer
Posts: 3882
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:14 am

Quoting PanAm_DC10 (Thread starter):
they will require 6 months to 1 year before they make a decision as to which model they will order between the A350XWB and B787.

This is interesting. Now we know why Boeing said they won't make a decision on a 2nd production line until sometime next year.

Quoting BlueSky1976 (Reply 29):
Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26):
Well duh. It's a paper airplane with no firm specifications that was drafted for explicitly for EK.

So is 787-10.



Quoting 787engineer (Reply 36):
Who knows, the 787-10 isn't much more of a "real" airplane than the A350XWB. Both are still very conceptual.

I'd say at this point the 787 is much closer to a "real" airplane. It has been through a considerable amount of wind-tunnel testing as well as much analysis. It's first major components are already being manufactured. The 350xwb is only in "conceptual" form at this point.

Quoting Johnny (Reply 37):
EK seems to be unhappy with the B787, otherwise they would have ordered it already.

SQ seems to be unhappy with the A350, otherwise, they would have ordered it already. Come to think of it, BA, LH, AF, KL, UA, AA, CO, DL, CX, etc. must all be unhappy with the A350, otherwise, they would have ordered it already.  Wink
My other home is in the sky inside my Piper Cherokee 180.
 
SeeTheWorld
Posts: 1090
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 2:46 am

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:31 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 28):
Because maybe in the end it is better to risk having to wait 6 months for a plane which actually does what you really want it to, than to get a plane delivered on time which falls sort of your needs for the rest of its life time?

I'm sorry, but this comment doesn't really make sense. Waiting until the plane is ready vs. taking it right now doesn't solve the problem that Airbus has.

You're basically saying that if I have a home manufacturer that is building me a house which is six months late and it's going to be another six months late because it still needs a roof, it's better to wait the six months for the roof then to move in now? Well, DUH!

The point was, given the scenario above, if I'm getting ready to accept a bid from a builder for a beach house and the two firms who are bidding include the one that has delayed my house above, who am I more likely to lean toward? I think that was the point - nothing more, nothing less.

It doesn't mean I'm not going to choose my current builder, but it means I'm going to be skeptical about what he is promising in the bid.
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 3:42 am

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 45):
Totally wrong, Airbus already have a fully CFRP designed & assembled wing,

The A400M wing structure is predominantly designed towards coping with static and dynamic loads introduced by four huge turboprop engines. It is a stiff, low taper, low sweep wing with a comparably thick subsonic airfoil. The A400M has a fuselage mounted main landing gear.

In contrast, the A350 wing structure is designed towards coping with torsional bending loads resulting from about 33 degree aft sweep required for M0.85 flight. It is a flexible, highly tapered, high-aspect ratio wing with a comparably thin supercritical airfoil. The A350 wing structure is also designed towards coping with the loads introduced by the main landing gear, which will probably necessitate a change in design principles as compared to previous Airbus aircraft.

All in all - and I left quite a few things out - these two wing designs don't seem to have too much in common to me.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: EK: A350/B787 Decision Not For 6 Months

Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:45 am

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 45):
. Btw there are Al-Li alloys and other composites which are ligther then CFRP. But i think the fuselage will be a mix of diffrent materials.
Anyway i think the chances are 50/50 for 787 and a350 both have good things which would fit to EK 's plans. It will be a very interesting order.

and the Al-Li alloys you are referring to probably isn't used in plane fuselages..the main Al-Li alloys are heavier (and more density) than the CFRP used in building fuselages..

1)CFRP has a lower density than Al-Li (1.5 versus 2.6-2.7)-Mg*m^-3
2)CFRP has a higher Youngs Modulus-(70-200 versus 70)-Gn*M^2
3)CFRP has a higher critical stress intensity factor (i.e.-stress factor)-(32-45 versus 23-45)MN n^-3/2

the most important one is the first one...density....

the Al-Li alloys are the "standard" variations used- (not that it makes too much of a difference)

sources: University of Cambridge, Society for the Advancement of Material and Process Engineering, READE Corp., Virginia Tech.edu,
"Up the Irons!"