Sangas
Topic Author
Posts: 173
Joined: Tue Apr 25, 2006 8:52 pm

Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:28 am



Quote:
From now through 2015 about 1,600 airplanes in the 200-400 seat market will need to be delivered. If you look at the 787 vs. the A350, the Airbus offering is at least five years later and doesn't appear to have any added technology. And the 777 is available now, 8 years sooner than the competing Airbus product.


http://boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2007/04/market_timing.html

Is Randy being bold in his assessment or is his logic irrefutable?

[Edited 2007-04-11 23:32:30]
A camel only sees the other camels' humps
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:44 am

Quoting Sangas (Thread starter):
Is Randy being bold in his assessment or is his logic irrefutable?

Randy is basically stating the obvious. The need to fill interim capacity is real, and it's no surprise that orders for the 777 and A330 continue to pour-in at healthy rates.
 
scorpy
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2006 6:26 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:04 am

he also fails to point out that most of the first few years of the 787 is now sold out unless the subcontractors speed up the process andmore slots come available.
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:11 am

I thought he never comments on Airbus products...

Anyway obviously he forgot to mention that 787 is sold out until ...A350 arrives. And obviously forgot about A330. Typical spin for B crowd.
 
siromega
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:57 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:15 am

Quoting Scorpy (Reply 2):
he also fails to point out that most of the first few years of the 787 is now sold out unless the subcontractors speed up the process andmore slots come available.

I'm not sure that is his point. He is saying that 1500+ planes need to be delivered, and to Boeing thats $$$ - Boeing is earning revenue on those delivered planes and Airbus is shipping 330s that are priced lower because its a less desirable choice than then 787. Even as the 787-10 enters into service, Airbus is still delivering 330s and 340s. And even if the A350 matches 787 performance and Airbus can price it accordingly, Boeing has been delivering them for over 5 years at this point and has a ton of money in the bank to spend on other projects.

Through the other side of the glass, if you're running an airline and your main competitors are replacing and expanding with the 787 and you're still going along with 330s or 767s, you're losing. You have less efficient aircraft and higher CASM, and a smaller profit margin to boot, you're missing out on profitable routes you cant fly because of range or payload capabilities of your a/c.
 
keesje
Posts: 8863
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:18 am

I think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

The 787 as a 767/A300/10 replacement should have been there from 2002, preventing Airbus having a party with the A330 between 2000 and 2010. Timing is everything indeed  Wink
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:32 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
The 787 as a 767/A300/10 replacement should have been there from 2002, preventing Airbus having a party with the A330 between 2000 and 2010. Timing is everything indeed

Well, since it's your position to deem when Boeing "should" have introduced the 787, it's no surprise that you would have preferred Boeing to rush a product to the market. Waiting several years allowed Boeing to take advantage of significantly more advanced technology that wasn't viable for EIS in 2002.

Not that I'm expecting a response from you, it's worth noting that three years of 787-8 sales have surpassed a decade of A330-200 sales. Looks like Boeing gets to crash the party after all....
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:36 am

I usually enjoy reading his blog, but this is the most factually crooked and one sided one yet.

New 777s are NOT available now, and he ignores the existance of the entire A330/A340 family for some reason.

[Edited 2007-04-12 00:39:02]
 
PolymerPlane
Posts: 832
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 1:12 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:36 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 6):

Not that I'm expecting a response from you, it's worth noting that three years of 787-8 sales have surpassed a decade of A330-200 sales. Looks like Boeing gets to crash the party after all....

Oh come DfwRevolution, you can't compare A330-200 sales to 787-8.. we all know that noboby's gonna order anymore 787-8.. It's too small for any airlines.

Cheers,
PP
One day there will be 100% polymer plane
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 868
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:48 am

I'd like to know what Boeing and Airbus can deliver up to 2015 of those 1500 as yet unspoken for units.

Much Dinero......

Point made earlier, how many slots does Boeing have left? 787 is committed and a runaway success and Boeing will sell everything the can make. So this a sales pitch of 777 now is better than 350-1000 later more than 787 versus A350.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:57 am

There aren't 777s available now. But I guess there are from 2011, so there are still five years of deliveries before the A350-1000.

But it seems that Boeing can't fill all 1590 units by 2015 if they wanted to, even if people continued to buy 767s. Then again, Airbus can deliver 600+ A330s by then (new orders, not backlog as stated), and would start delivering A350s in bulk in 2014.

Seems like both companies will have good years to come!

Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
I think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

Yep. He's the only one who does that in sales though. Everyone else is honest, honest, honest. And on A.net, nobody from Holland does that...  Wink
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1555
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:15 pm

Quoting Justloveplanes (Reply 9):
So this a sales pitch of 777 now is better than 350-1000 later more than 787 versus A350.

I think we put too much emphasis on comparing the 350 against the 787 when it is apparent that the real competitor of the 350 is the 777. Randy realizes this and that is why he focuses on the 777 in his blog. Of course Randy's comments are for people like us who like to chew on this stuff.

What I think Randy's blog reveals is that Boeing is very concerned the 350 will seriously impact the 777 program. Boeing will have to do a lot more than give us cheerful blogs to counter the 350. If Boeing can upgrade the 777 to match the 350s economics, it could continue as a viable competitor to the 350. After all, the 777 has a wider fuselage than the xwb and can market those extra few inches. It will be very interesting to see what Boeing does over the next few years with the 777
 
tootallsd
Posts: 458
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:02 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:21 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
It will be very interesting to see what Boeing does over the next few years with the 777

And they will have the people resources and money to do something. Unlike Airbus that will still (for 3 years?) be hemorraghing under the A380 launch and designing the A350XWB123.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:43 pm

Quoting Danny (Reply 3):
And obviously forgot about A330. Typical spin for B crowd.

It's already outdated. It'll see leases as a stop gap or buys from government controlled airlines paying cash not worried about long term residual value. Otherwise, its a dead aircraft.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:45 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
What I think Randy's blog reveals is that Boeing is very concerned the 350 will seriously impact the 777 program.

Boeing is nervous that the A350 could have the same headstart on the 777 replacement that the 787 has on the 350.

The upside is that a 787-11 could be built by 2015, with 350 seats like the A350-1000. The real question is if the 787-11 is practical. Can it truly replace a 77W?

The other question is does an A350-1000 really replace the 77W? It has fewer seats, but that's not a huge deal. But does it have the payload/range performance? We don't know yet...

And how would things be impacted if Boeing instead of launching the 787-11, launched a new pair of jets in 2012 for EIS of 2016. 340 seat and 400 seat twins with GEnx2 engines. The 808-8 would EIS in 2016, the 808-9 in 2018 or something like that. The 748 and 777 would remain as freighter platforms...

Airbus would still have a head start on sales by years, since they launch their products so early (6-8 year development time!!!), but the A346/77W replacement cycle really won't be starting until 2016 anyway, when "12 year" airlines start dumping their first planes of this generation...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:52 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
What I think Randy's blog reveals is that Boeing is very concerned the 350 will seriously impact the 777 program

Finally somebody realizes what is happening with the A350. They cannot completely fight off the 787, so Airbus decided to fight the older 777 and the larger variants of the 787. But then again, by the time the A350 flies, the 777 will have completed its 20th year in service.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
If Boeing can upgrade the 777 to match the 350s economics, it could continue as a viable competitor to the 350

Only choice they have.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:52 pm

Quoting EI321 (Reply 7):
and he ignores the existance of the entire A330/A340 family for some reason

Do you really have to wonder why? What on earth does Randy (and by proxy: Boeing) stand to gain by pointing out how well one of their competitor's products is selling?

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
I think we put too much emphasis on comparing the 350 against the 787 when it is apparent that the real competitor of the 350 is the 777.

Yes and no. For the time being, airlines will likely compare the A350-800/900 to the 787-9 more than the 777.

The A350-1000 is simply too far away with too many unknowns to be an aircraft of serious consideration as of 2007. Assuming Airbus maintains their schedule (which is a BIG if, to say the least) the A350-1000 is nine years away. For comparison, think of all the dynamics that occurred between 1994 and 2003; a nine year period between 772A roll-out and 773ER certification. A whole lot can change in nine years, and the A350-1000 will remain the paperest of paper airplanes for some time.

Randy is spot-on when he says that the 777 (-300ER in particular) several enjoy many more years of solid orders.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
If Boeing can upgrade the 777 to match the 350s economics, it could continue as a viable competitor to the 350.

The upgrade path is a dangerous one. As Airbus learned with the A350 XWB, the cost of upgrading an existing airframe to competitive specifications is often better spent developing an all-new aircraft.

Boeing does have some options in terms of growing the 787, as has been discussed ad nauseam in other threads, or the possibility of launching a new large aircraft sometime after 2015.
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:10 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
The upside is that a 787-11 could be built by 2015, with 350 seats like the A350-1000. The real question is if the 787-11 is practical. Can it truly replace a 77W?

My hunch is that going to this size will be more appropriate for another airframe vs. another stretch. I'd also put money on the cabin being wider than the WXB for certain, and my guess it will have a cabin about 7.5" wider than a 777 to accomodate 3+3+3 with 21.5" aisles.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:17 pm

I don't think Boeing is that worried about Y3 Vs A350 given that the A350 in many ways isn't on the level of the 787 for technology. I think the bleedless engines alone is something vital that Airbus has left on the table to for Boeing to beat them around the head with.

The concern is however that Boeing might lose some market share on the A350-10 being something that airlines need, and Boeing having no current answer for. On the other hand I think the smallest Y3 will soundly eat the A350-10's lunch in operating economics / lifetime costs if Boeing goes that small with it. Just that well the 737RS won't be out of the engineers hair until around the time the A350 starts delivery. So does Boeing start designing Y-3 in power point and sell airlines on the paper version 6? 7? 8? years before it will be delivered, or so they follow the normal practice of quiet discussions with the airlines about their needs, followed by a aggressive real development program starting a mere 4-5 years before delivery? In other words will Boeing follow Airbus's lead in "marketing and design" with a hell of alot of talk about a plane, years before they actually do "real work" on the plane?
 
airfrnt
Posts: 2002
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:56 pm

Quoting Danny (Reply 3):
I thought he never comments on Airbus products...

No, he is using Airbus's date projections here, not predicting a 6 month delay on Airbus's products simply so they don't look so bad.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:43 pm

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 19):
The concern is however that Boeing might lose some market share on the A350-10 being something that airlines need, and Boeing having no current answer for.

They do have a current answer. One airlines are buying. They don't have a 2015 answer...  Wink

It's very similar to Airbus's "current answer" to the 787, the A330. But obviously the 200-300 seat market is bigger than the 300-400 seat market for jetliners.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 4:21 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 21):
They do have a current answer. One airlines are buying. They don't have a 2015 answer...

well, the buisness boeing and Airbus are in, you have all kinds of wacky timeframes to deal with. Given that some airlines will be shopping TODAY for a solution in the 2013-2015 range you have some need to be selling now what they need then. Airbus has lately tried to do this by announcing a program when they have no more than a powerpoint slide or three. So while Y3 will be arriving "minutes" after the A350-10 in real hardware, given a typical Boeing development and marketing cycle we will not be hearing about it till just before the first A350 flys, or maybe right around the EIS of the first A350.

Now I think many airlines that REALLY need a A350-10, but don't need it right now will have a intelectual understanding that Boeing will have thier toy in hardware sooner rather than later despite not talking about it now. The problem is that Airlines are run by people, and people HATE uncertainty, so they are much more likley to order a A350-10 today than they are going to wait for a Y3 they know nothing about the specs of. The 737RS has an advantage in that there is very little room for it to shock you in a negative manner, but Y3 we know nothing about what Boeing is thinking in public, and not being constrained by any hard and solid expectations of it.. it could be anything. So if you wait for Y3 to have a small A350-10 version, and it turns out Boeing got the good (bad?) drugs the week they decided to make it the size of a A380-900 to start with and only get bigger from there. So its very easy to convice people that a 737RS is worth waiting for w/o telling them anything, yet a Y3 is very hard to do without actualy selling them a real set of rough specifications.

Then again I think there will be a HUGE 787 effect. One in which suddently after years and years of never getting enough midsize capacity, you get a glut of frames dropping into the used market. So if you are looking at a A350-10 a couple of years from now, you might well just decide to grab a handful of 777/A330/767's on a cheap(ish) lease and wait till you know what both sides are bringing to the game. Of course quality of said frames might be a concern, depending on your airline. Certainly this is what Airbus has been trying to work against the 787 with cheap lease or buys on new A330 frames. Only time will tell if that worked or not. Before anyone yells, cheap does not mean loss leader, or "free" aircraft, it means that people who normaly would be in a long argument to get normal moderate discounts, get a long argument why the A350 is right for them and a quick approval on "best customer" priced A330's.
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 868
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 6:03 pm

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
The upside is that a 787-11 could be built by 2015, with 350 seats like the A350-1000. The real question is if the 787-11 is practical. Can it truly replace a 77W?

Has there been any insider information or press releases on a possible 787-11? It seems like another a340-600 situation and I doubt Boeing would build a triple stretch - they have publicly argued against covering that large a market with one airframe.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 17):
The upgrade path is a dangerous one. As Airbus learned with the A350 XWB, the cost of upgrading an existing airframe to competitive specifications is often better spent developing an all-new aircraft.

Sometimes yes (original A350), sometimes no (737NG). If Boeing can get to 1500 frames with the 777, including freighters, I guess that would be more than enough to target for Y3.

This raises the orginal post by Randy:

1590 frames EXCLUDING BACKLOG....which means the 500 787, etc. as of today, doesn't count.

Proposed mix

Taking Randy's number of 1590 at face value

B777 350
B787 600
A330 300
A350 300

This is roughly the 60% widebody split we have seen the last two years.

How can production for Boeing meet these numbers? that's about 175 787's a year or about 15/month for 2012 to 2015?

777 looks doable at about 6 per month for 2011 to 2015. A330 No problem, but the A350 is about 12 month for two years at startup.
 
DAYflyer
Posts: 3546
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:46 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

Yes, and we all know that NOBODY form AIRBUS ever does THAT, thank heavens.
One Nation Under God
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Thu Apr 12, 2007 9:49 pm

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 23):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
think randy is famous for selecting his numbers & avoiding others.

Yes, and we all know that NOBODY form AIRBUS ever does THAT, thank heavens.

Well for a start, two wrongs dont make a right, and airbus certainly dont publish propaganda like this!
 
aa1818
Posts: 1518
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 2:03 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:38 am

I have some questions.

The A350 is being built with similar materials to the 787 except they are in pieces and will be 'screwed' together adding weight. The A350 is using the same engine as Boeing except not bleedless so that would make them marginally less efficient.

However, the A350 manages to exceed Boeing's proposed range and 'match' Boeing's performance as we heard from Clark of EK. Is this simply due to the fact that The A350 has an XWB so that it can seat a few more people to be efficient. If that is the case then if Boeing basically rolled barells to the size of the A350, and used the bleedless engines, then the 787 'should' kill the A350?

I'm not very technical and may not have explained my point very clearly, but I guess what I'm asking is if the A350 is not capitalizing on all of the latest tech which Boeing is using, how the heck can it match performance and efficiency targets of the Dreamliner?

I'm in no way saying anything bad about the A350, i'm simply enquiring!

Cheers
AA1818
“The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it.” J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan)
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 8590
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:47 am

Quoting Justloveplanes (Reply 22):
Sometimes yes (original A350), sometimes no (737NG).

Keep in mind that the A320 didn't offer a fuel burn reduction of +20% over the 737 classic series. Had that been the case, a competitive 737NG may have well been impossible. The A350-900 and 787-10 will likely trump the 772ER by this magnitude, and it would easily cost billions to upgrade the 777 sufficiently. You're talking about two very different circumstances.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 24):
and airbus certainly dont publish propaganda like this!

Yeah, John Leahy let's the press transcribe it for him....  Wink
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 12:59 am

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
The A350 is using the same engine as Boeing except not bleedless so that would make them marginally less efficient.

The trent XWB is intended to have 2% better SFC over the trent 1000.

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 26):
Keep in mind that the A320 didn't offer a fuel burn reduction of +20% over the 737 classic series. Had that been the case, a competitive 737NG may have well been impossible.

I think the 737NG engines had something like a 7% improvement in fuel burn over the 737-300/400/500.

Re the 787 20% figure. Its refering to 20% lower operating costs through a combination of better engine SFC, lower fuel burn via reduced weight, better systems, and others, no?
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:11 am

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
The A350 is being built with similar materials to the 787 except they are in pieces and will be 'screwed' together adding weight.

According to Airbus there is no extra weight due to this but there is an ease of maintenance.

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
The A350 is using the same engine as Boeing except not bleedless so that would make them marginally less efficient.

There is no proof of any advantage of bleedless design.

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
However, the A350 manages to exceed Boeing's proposed range and 'match' Boeing's performance as we heard from Clark of EK. Is this simply due to the fact that The A350 has an XWB so that it can seat a few more people to be efficient. If that is the case then if Boeing basically rolled barells to the size of the A350, and used the bleedless engines, then the 787 'should' kill the A350?

No, Boeing will not redesign 787. Why would they?
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1459
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:11 am

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
The A350 is being built with similar materials to the 787 except they are in pieces and will be 'screwed' together adding weight. The A350 is using the same engine as Boeing except not bleedless so that would make them marginally less efficient.

That has been discussed already and the additional weight using shells against monolithic will be about + /- 500kg.

Wrong the A350XWB will not use same engines as Boeing. They will probably 2% more efficient then the engines of the 787.
There is no prove that a plane with bleedless engines will be more efficient, but probably it will reduce MX time.

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
the tech which Boeing is using, how the heck can it match performance and efficiency targets of the Dreamliner?

As i said it will have better engines, probably a very good composite wing and a similar aerodynamic frame or better then the 787.
However its to early to say if this will be enough to surpass the 787 efficiency, when the design of the A350 isnt even frozen.
“Faliure is not an option.”
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:19 am

Quoting Danny (Reply 28):
Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
The A350 is using the same engine as Boeing except not bleedless so that would make them marginally less efficient.

There is no proof of any advantage of bleedless design.



Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 29):
There is no prove that a plane with bleedless engines will be more efficient, but probably it will reduce MX time

Bleedless design does require additional weight elsewhere on the aircraft if im not mistaken.
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:27 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 24):
airbus certainly dont publish propaganda like this

What propaganda? That the market exists for planes? That Boeing jets are more available until 2013, but then Airbus's new product comes out?

I'm not exactly sure what is so biased about that.

I know many were really upset about Randy's blog about the 748F vs. A380F, and how it was skewed. But either all the freight carriers are idiots, or maybe Randy's analysis wasn't so much propaganda as reality. The sales numbers and cancelations seem to reinforce his analysis...

But honestly, Airbus and Boeing both publish real propaganda on their product pages.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:44 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 27):
Its refering to 20% lower operating costs through a combination of better engine SFC, lower fuel burn via reduced weight, better systems, and others, no?

It is a combination of many things as mentioned, not just the engines.

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 29):
There is no prove that a plane with bleedless engines will be more efficient, but probably it will reduce MX time.

If it reduces MX time, it becomes a part of the efficiency improvement due to costs saved.

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 29):
However its to early to say if this will be enough to surpass the 787 efficiency, when the design of the A350 isnt even frozen.

Aviation history is full of stories about unanticipated operational improvements over existing technologies. Till the 787 is flying and earning revenue, we will not know how it actually performs in real life. There might be other efficiencies over composites that will make airlines demand other composite airplanes, much like what occurred when jets took over propeller airplanes.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 30):
Bleedless design does require additional weight elsewhere on the aircraft if im not mistaken.

Only a redistribution of existing weight, probably not added weight.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 31):
But honestly, Airbus and Boeing both publish real propaganda on their product pages.

Whether you call it propaganda or PR, it is still the same thing.
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 1:46 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 31):
Quoting EI321 (Reply 24):
airbus certainly dont publish propaganda like this

What propaganda? That the market exists for planes? That Boeing jets are more available until 2013, but then Airbus's new product comes out?

He is trying to create a false perception of the market. A perception that 777s are available now when they are not. A perception that 787s are available in 2008 when they are not available until 2012 at the abolute earliest. A perception that there is no viable alternative to the 777 & 787 until 2013, this is also false. Plain and simple. Some of his blogs are very good (seriously) but this particular one is a just downright dishonest.

In essence, in this blog Randy is focusing on the airliner market between now and 2013. There are no A350 or 787 slots available between now and then. So boeing and airbus have the A330, A340, 777 and 767 to offer in the 200-400 seat market. A330/A340 will be running at 9-10 per month. Im not sure about the 777 or 767 but the combined figure will be similar I assume. Both the A330/A340 & 777 lines are likely to be at full production capacity until 2013. Airlines cant get these planes fast enough. Thats how the situation is in reality.
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 627
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:09 am

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 16):
The upgrade path is a dangerous one. As Airbus learned with the A350 XWB, the cost of upgrading an existing airframe to competitive specifications is often better spent developing an all-new aircraft.

If some of the 787 technologies do really pan out in terms of efficiency to manufacturer, maintain, and operate I would not expect to see any major upgrades to the 777 but instead the Y3 would come on line. If from a systems architecture it is very much the 787 but a new fuse and wing suitable for 9 to 10 or 10 to 11 across, possibly using the 777 landing gear.

One thing with the 787 not talked about is the significantly less wiring in it. It has something like 20 less miles of wire in the plane than a 767. Simplifying the wiring by using a network bus and addressible devices for all but the most critical components could save a lot of cost, weight and complexity. It used to be a building fire alarm system had hard wire loops for each zone. Now each device reports into a single loop. Instead of having 500 pairs in the main FA riser there is now 40 pairs of wires the same size. Still fully supervised and much better reporting and notification capabilities.

The real question for the Y3 is where it fits between the 787-10 and the 748. I suspect the largest will be just a bit bigger than the 773ER. Program launch in 2013 possibly
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 2:15 am

Quoting JayinKitsap (Reply 34):
One thing with the 787 not talked about is the significantly less wiring in it. It has something like 20 less miles of wire in the plane than a 767. Simplifying the wiring by using a network bus and addressible devices for all but the most critical components could save a lot of cost, weight and complexity.

I think another advantage of less wiring is safety. The less wires on an old plane, the less chance of one of them starting a fire.
 
keesje
Posts: 8863
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 3:23 am

Randy´s blog has been changed. It is impossible now to get pictures / graphs of him from the past..

I was looking for some embarrasing ones but they seem to be gone..

Why?  Wink Randy´s great visiualizations like these will now be gone for ever (unless someone copied them)..

http://www.lomag-man.org/hubdetransport/imageshubaero/airbus-boeing-rangs-avions_on_time_arrival_lg.jpg

We should load them as much as possible into our a.net images for future reference & entertainment
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
andessmf
Posts: 5689
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 8:53 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 3:38 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 35):
Quoting JayinKitsap (Reply 34):
One thing with the 787 not talked about is the significantly less wiring in it. It has something like 20 less miles of wire in the plane than a 767. Simplifying the wiring by using a network bus and addressible devices for all but the most critical components could save a lot of cost, weight and complexity.

I think another advantage of less wiring is safety. The less wires on an old plane, the less chance of one of them starting a fire.

And this goes back again to the expected efficiency of the 787 and what it could do to the airline finances. Less wiring also means less initial costs and MX, especially in man-hours. When a new technology comes along, the adoption of the new technology may be quicker than imagined.

I always recall the adoption of large-format printers for the construction industry. We got our in 1999. I made a quick calculation that $$ wise it was about the same costs as before, but the man hours savings could be about $40,000/year in our office alone. The change was so drastic, that many companies, including us, left perfectly working large-format inkjet printers behind and blueprint machines as well. Now it is very difficult and almost impossible to find this old technology around.

I get the feeling that with these new technologies, or the implementation of certain efficiencies in the 787/A350 may quickly create instant obsolescence for older style airplanes, hopefully ushering in another golden age in aviation, similar to the beginnings of the jet age.
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 5:50 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 36):
We should load them as much as possible into our a.net images for future reference & entertainment

Maybe we should also dig up all of those John Lehay quotes about the 787.....  Wink

That would be very entertaining
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1555
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:22 pm

Quoting EI321 (Reply 33):
A perception that 777s are available now when they are not. A perception that 787s are available in 2008 when they are not available until 2012 at the abolute earliest.

Of course the 777 is available now -- maybe not to those who haven't ordered them, but those who have will get em. Also, there is always the ability to alter the production schedule -- whereby one airline agrees to defer or sell its slot to another. And hidden availibility in the schedule. I can't remember which recent 787 customer was able to secure some early 787 slots despite the line being sold out for years. We on a.net were very surprised I recall.

So, while getting a 777 or 787 might be extremely difficult, you can get one if you try -- you can't get a 350 under any scenario at present.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2639
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:29 pm

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 40):
Of course the 777 is available now

I forgot just how many frames a month Boeing just started increasing the production rate to, but it does mean ALOT of planes will be available each year starting not too long from now. Certainly opens up the chance to get your hands on some in 08 if you ask nicely and carry a fat wallet. I think the 787 will be the same way, though possibly more on a "in case we find we made extra" basis for sales happening today since Boeing doesn't know today just how far they can push the 787 production a couple years after they start real production.
 
StickShaker
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:34 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:39 pm

Quoting SirOmega (Reply 4):
Boeing is earning revenue on those delivered planes and Airbus is shipping 330s that are priced lower because its a less desirable choice than then 787

This is a complete myth.
The 330's are priced lower because at 1000 frames the R&D costs have largely been amortised. Airbus can sell the aircraft at cost + margin. Boeing have to recoup some $8B in R&D on the 787 so while they may be able to build it at a similar (or lower) cost than the 330 the sale price must include a component to service that $8B debt - hence the higher price.
The upside for Boeing is that with so many 787 sales in the first few years a significant portion of the $8B debt will have been retired by the time the 350XWB arrives. The situation will then be reversed with Airbus having to service the R&D debt for the 350 (reflected in sale prices) and compete against a partly amortised 787 - not an easy task.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
I think we put too much emphasis on comparing the 350 against the 787 when it is apparent that the real competitor of the 350 is the 777

  
The demise of the 346 has changed the focus of the 350 program.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
What I think Randy's blog reveals is that Boeing is very concerned the 350 will seriously impact the 777 program

  

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
Boeing is nervous that the A350 could have the same headstart on the 777 replacement that the 787 has on the 350.
  

The upside is that a 787-11 could be built by 2015, with 350 seats like the A350-1000. The real question is if the 787-11 is practical. Can it truly replace a 77W?

  
A significant increase in gross weight would be required for a 787-11 to have useful range. Must be approaching the limits of the design - would have thought an aircraft this size is better handled by Y3.

Cheers,
StickShaker

[Edited 2007-04-13 15:42:10]
 
AirSpare
Posts: 570
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:13 am

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Sat Apr 14, 2007 12:31 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 5):
should have been there from 2002,

In hindsight, there may be some merit to that.

Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
market those extra few inches

I really think the 777 cabin width is pretty sweet for the PAX load they carry. I buy'em!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
787-11 could be built

Please no..!

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 14):
starting until 2016 anyway

This is why I think a T7ish barrel in a Y3 should be done, it would be good ot see the T7 go out on top, manufactured discontinued with Y3 for sale.

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 17):
more appropriate for another airframe

Exactly, I prefer to spend my money on the T7 size fuselage on the hub 2 hub thing, can't wait to fly more p2p as B787 promises. signed, educated consumer. As an a.nutter, I'd prefer to see the 781 and larger become part of Y3

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 25):
except not bleedless

Another posted, diferentt thread said that it is "bleedless", but named something else. It will be interesting to see if true. I started a thread last year if they would be forced to go bleeedless. I doubt that the marketeers can use that term, let's wait and see what A is showing EK but not to a.net. It will be nice to see some real program data!

Quoting Danny (Reply 28):
an ease of maintenance.

I worked on early military aircraft composite panels including radomes (with a frigging speed handle) but not on this scale. This may not end up to be an advantage, just a process, starting at manufacturing then dowm the road.

I continue to hate seeing the 787-10 posted. Another poster called it the SardineLiner, I'd tend to agree.

ok Randy,
Get someone else for your hero worship fetish
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 4970
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Randy's Blog: "Timing Is Everything"

Sat Apr 14, 2007 1:20 am

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 15):
Finally somebody realizes what is happening with the A350. They cannot completely fight off the 787, so Airbus decided to fight the older 777 and the larger variants of the 787

I posted this on another thread that the A350 was aimed more at the 777 then the 787, as the 777 is with the 787 replacing the 767 the oldest design in Boeing's folder

Quoting AndesSMF (Reply 15):
Quoting JAAlbert (Reply 11):
If Boeing can upgrade the 777 to match the 350s economics, it could continue as a viable competitor to the 350

Only choice they have.

No it's not; they will be developing Y3 after the 737RS, and it should hit the market not too long after the larger A350's.
As to the size of Y3, I believe the base model will be slightly larger than the 77W, with smaller versions to replace the 772's and larger ones to replace the 748. It may not go as large as the 748; Boeing may not believe that there is enough of a market there to justify the development costs. That is why they did not answer the A380 with a larger plane.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler