MCIGuy
Topic Author
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

"xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:04 am

Am I the only one who finds the "A350XWB" name kind of ridiculous? I'm not slamming the design, just the name. It's almost redundant, like someone in the States saying "VIN number". Besides, it's not really an "XWB", it's just a "WB". If anything, the A380 is the "XWB". I know they needed to differentiate it from the original A350, but I still think they should have gone to an entirely different model number. Besides, it really has nothing in common with the original A350 design. "A360" would have sounded cool, kind of an indicator that "we've been around the block and now we're back". What say you, a.net?

 Smile
Airliners.net Moderator Team
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5807
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:07 am

I say you worry too much. Airbus needed some way to let everyone know that this version (Mk. V at the time, now Mk. VI) was drastically different from Mk. IV. Furthermore, it was an attempt to set it apart from the 787.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
MCIGuy
Topic Author
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:11 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 1):

I'm not really "worried" about it, like, I won't lose any sleep. I'm just saying, I think from a marketing perspective it'd have been better to give it an all-new name. The original A350 was a bumpy road and I'd think they'd like to leave it in the rear view mirror. Maybe it'd have improved (potential) customer perception? "We've left that old thing and all it's problems behind. Now we're offering this cool, new thing".
Airliners.net Moderator Team
 
birdbrainz
Posts: 423
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 6:57 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:21 am

I don't know. By tagging "XWB" on the end, it will always beg the question how it got its name, and they will have to relive the story time and time again. Also, the XWB name is giving credence to the 787, unless they say that the extra wide body is relative to the A330/A340.

Ditto for the A360. Someone will always ask, "what happened to the A350?"

I would have just called the new plane the A350. All that said, it's really not a big deal either way.

By the way, I think the XWB name is cheesy as well. How about XBW ("extra bendy wings") or XCF ("extra carbon fiber") for the 787?  Smile I hope this XWB thing doesn't start a trend.
A good landing is one you can walk away from. A great landing is if the aircraft can be flown again.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:22 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
Am I the only one who finds the "A350XWB" name kind of ridiculous?

I view it as a short-term marketing thing. The actual plane seems to be formally designated the A350, which is why I no longer append "XWB" when referring to it.
 
AeroWesty
Posts: 19551
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 7:37 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:23 am

Since the name came with the redesign at the time there was so much controversy over whether they'd gotten the plane "right" or not, XWB was probably the way to go, to distinguish it from the 787, not previous A350s.
International Homo of Mystery
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:27 am

eXactwy
Wike
Boeing
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
MCIGuy
Topic Author
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:37 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
I view it as a short-term marketing thing.

So you think it'll eventually be dropped like "7X7", "7J7" and "7E7"?
Airliners.net Moderator Team
 
mandala499
Posts: 6458
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2001 8:47 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:56 am

Well, XWB is "Xtra Wide Bu77!"... indicating the different tail cross section being wider than the standard A300/310/330/340 butt the have!

LOL

XtWemely Boring...
When losing situational awareness, pray Cumulus Granitus isn't nearby !
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:14 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 6):
eXactwy
Wike
Boeing

 laughing Waskawy Wabbit! I'm putting you on my WU list for that! smile 
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:15 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 7):
So you think it'll eventually be dropped like "7X7", "7J7" and "7E7"?

Yes.
 
gregarious119
Posts: 399
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 3:59 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:15 am

Seriously - I'm glad I'm not the only one that feels this way. Airbus A350 Extra Wide Body is a bit of a mouthful, ya think? Maybe it's not so bad in french...

Wait...they named it XWB...as in Extra Wide Body. That's a VERY English, if not American, name  headache . What would the designator be if they used the same name in French - any why didn't they use that?
 
cygnuschicago
Posts: 518
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:34 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:24 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
I know they needed to differentiate it from the original A350

Since one of the biggest criticisms of the original A350 was that it was the same width as the A300/330/340, the XWB refers to the fact that they changed the fuselage, not that it's wider than any particular Boeing. It's kind of a marketing "hey, we heard you guys, and we've listened". In practice I think it is going to disappear. Many articles are already just speaking about the A350.

The big nomenclature error was the original A350. It was a warmed over A330, and should simply have been known as the A330E or A330NG.

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
"A360" would have sounded cool, kind of an indicator that "we've been around the block and now we're back".

Before the XWB announcement, Airbus internally considered calling it the A280 or the A370.
If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
 
Tom_EDDF
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2000 8:47 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:24 am

Because Airbus is an international company selling to international customers. Airbus never used french messaging in their marketing, you won't even find a french version of their web site. In the end, it's a wholly owned subsidary of EADS which is controlled by french and german share holders, based in the Netherlands, with production facilities all across Europe and soon China, and final assembly lines in France and Germany.

It's not a french company, even though the french goverments tendency to view it this way and attempts to intervene sometimes make it look like it (Forgeard for instance, a career politician, was installed by the french government as EADS CEO)

Cheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeers
T
 
CJAContinental
Posts: 343
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 9:03 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:40 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
A350XWB

As far as trying to make the A351 seem superior to the 772, XWB won't really work, so I agree with you in that sense, because the 772 is just as wide, maybe less maybe more, at least not to the point where the A350 can accomadate more seats through its width. However, I think the name EWB would have been better, efficient wide body, due to the fact that the A350 would be more efficient than the current 772, and therefore the name would actually make the A351 unique to the 772, where as the the XWB does not imply a great difference between the A351 and 772.
Work Hard/Fly Right.
 
himself
Posts: 55
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 8:02 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:47 am

I think they're going to have to drop it, since even though it's "extra wide" it's still not as wide as the 777. I'm waiting for them to drop XWB like a codename and give the media less stuff to get wrong about it. (I've read in places "XBW" and "WBX") However, they've got time to fix it, since it won't be entering service for about 6 years.
 
robsawatsky
Posts: 477
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2003 7:07 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:48 am

Quoting Birdbrainz (Reply 3):
I don't know. By tagging "XWB" on the end, it will always beg the question how it got its name, and they will have to relive the story time and time again. Also, the XWB name is giving credence to the 787, unless they say that the extra wide body is relative to the A330/A340.

It may beg a question here, it won't beg any questions from anyone that actually buys or leases large, commercial, passenger aircraft since they already know the story. It doesn't give any extra credence to the 787 either, it simply acknowledges (again as all the buyers already know) the prime competition. They aren't selling automobiles to consumers where marketing spin makes as much or more of a difference than actual price/performance.
 
MIT787
Posts: 30
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:22 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 4:02 am

I wouldn't even mind letters if it rolled smoothly off my tongue. Like A350XL (for extra large fuselage). Sounds kinda good actually. Or how about A350XB? That is not too bad either...Just get rid of the damn W...  banghead 
 
CJAContinental
Posts: 343
Joined: Sat May 27, 2006 9:03 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 4:24 am

Quoting MIT787 (Reply 17):
A350XL



Quoting MIT787 (Reply 17):
A350XB

The only use for the name itself that Airbus can capitalise on is marketing, drawing attention, (I know I'm stating the obvious, sorry). The significance of what you have outlined here actually made me realise that as well as both of the names you have suggested, and the current XWB exploit, is that I think the marketers have used a common marketing trick by using a letter designed to add impact and therefore draw attention; X. The letter is used everywhere on a large variety of products. I think it works well, as I am sure products with extravagant names have drawn my attention at some point. So, actually, so long as the name contains X, the name should still have a more positive, attractive impact on its audience.

I think the name XE would be good, as the name contains the impact tool X to attract, and E (efficient) still makes the product exclusive to its competitor when referring to the 777, where as referring to the width of the aircraft won't.

[Edited 2007-07-05 21:27:00]

[Edited 2007-07-05 21:27:22]
Work Hard/Fly Right.
 
helvknight
Posts: 784
Joined: Fri Aug 04, 2006 10:35 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 4:54 am

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 6):
eXactwy
Wike
Boeing

God that was dreadful Big grin

I'd stick you on my RU (or WU - thanks Team America) but you're already there.
I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member - Groucho Marx
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 4:57 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
I view it as a short-term marketing thing. The actual plane seems to be formally designated the A350

 checkmark  right on the money, Stitch
 
hb88
Posts: 760
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:56 am

Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 12):
Before the XWB announcement, Airbus internally considered calling it the A280 or the A370.

Never heard the slightest whisper of the terms A280 or A370 at work, so I'm not sure where you got that from!

As for "XWB", personally I don't like it much, but find it no sillier than "Dreamliner"  Wink I prefer 350 or 787.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5807
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 5:58 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 21):
Never heard the slightest whisper of the terms A280 or A370 at work, so I'm not sure where you got that from!

I don't know about A370, but it was the Financial Times that stumbled upon the A280 ad that was never officially released. A few days later, the same ad was officially released, labeled 'A350 XWB' (with an explanation as to what 'XWB' meant.)

[Edited 2007-07-05 23:18:39]
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
hb88
Posts: 760
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:14 am

Quoting N328KF (Reply 22):
Quoting HB88 (Reply 21):
"Never heard the slightest whisper of the terms A280 or A370 at work, so I'm not sure where you got that from!"

I don't know about A370, but it was the Financial Times that stumbled upon the A280 ad that never was never officially released. A few days later, the same ad was officially released, labeled 'A350 XWB' (with an explanation as to what 'XWB' meant.)

Strange. I hadn't heard of the A280 story before and it seems hard to believe it can have been anything more than a mistake. The naming conventions for the a/c series are pretty fixed. Eh well!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:17 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 21):
Never heard the slightest whisper of the terms A280 or A370 at work, so I'm not sure where you got that from!

I do recall the A370 moniker being kicked about in the press, mainly to create a clean break from the A350 as well as position it just below the A370, but never the A280.
 
hb88
Posts: 760
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2005 1:25 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:21 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 24):
Quoting HB88 (Reply 21):
"Never heard the slightest whisper of the terms A280 or A370 at work, so I'm not sure where you got that from!"

I do recall the A370 moniker being kicked about in the press, mainly to create a clean break from the A350 as well as position it just below the A370, but never the A280.

By work, I meant Airbus, so if there had been a rumour, it probably would have been floating around. We usually get most of the rumours just before (or more commonly just after) they hit Flight Intl.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:24 am

Quoting HB88 (Reply 25):
By work, I meant Airbus, so if there had been a rumour, it probably would have been floating around. We usually get most of the rumours just before (or more commonly just after) they hit Flight Intl.

I understand you work for Airbus (at Brighton, correct?). This may have just been speculation within the press with no basis coming from information internally from Airbus.
 
T773ER
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:13 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:27 am

Doesn't the A350XWB-1000 sound like some sort of power saw you would pick up at your local hardware store and pay way too much for?

Introducing the A350XWB-1000 POWER SAW. Use it for all your wood cutting needs, heck it even does your laundry. Only 40 easy payments of 19.95! Please call now.
"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."
 
MCIGuy
Topic Author
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:30 am

Quoting T773ER (Reply 27):
Doesn't the A350XWB-1000 sound like some sort of power saw you would pick up at your local hardware store and pay way too much for?

Introducing the A350XWB-1000 POWER SAW. Use it for all your wood cutting needs, heck it even does your laundry. Only 40 easy payments of 19.95! Please call now.

  

The DeWalt A350XWB-1000 Power Saw, 36 volt Litium Ion!

:D

(again, poking fun at the name, not the product Wink)

[Edited 2007-07-05 23:50:56]
Airliners.net Moderator Team
 
T773ER
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:13 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 6:59 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Reply 28):
The DeWalt A350XWB-1000 Power Saw, 36 volt Litium Ion!

I find the 36 volt works best when cutting through dense materials, over the rather "weak" 18 or 21 volt models.
"Fixed fortifications are monuments to the stupidity of man."
 
777236ER
Posts: 12213
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2001 7:10 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:11 am

We had these arguments when Boeing dared to call the 787 varients the -3, -8 and -9, with some strange people on here refusing to call them that and deciding instead to call them -300, -800 and -900.

It's Airbus's choice what they call their aircraft. However much you disagree, if they call it the A350XWB, that's what its name is.
Your bone's got a little machine
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1767
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:17 am

Quoting T773ER (Reply 27):
Doesn't the A350XWB-1000 sound like some sort of power saw

It probably will, with all that Rolls-Royce power  Smile

Quoting T773ER (Reply 29):
I find the 36 volt works best when cutting through dense materials

Do you enjoy ripping panels?  Big grin
 
MCIGuy
Topic Author
Posts: 1445
Joined: Sun Mar 26, 2006 8:15 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 7:22 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 30):
It's Airbus's choice what they call their aircraft. However much you disagree, if they call it the A350XWB, that's what its name is.

Certainly, I wouldn't dispute that it's their plane so they can call it whatever they want. Far be it from me to try to talk sense into the Airbus' marketing folks (especially Mr. Leahy).  Silly
Seriously though, they can call it whatever they like, doesn't mean we have to like it. Like has already been pointed out, "A350XWB" is just too hard to say.
Airliners.net Moderator Team
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 22948
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:20 am

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 30):
It's Airbus's choice what they call their aircraft. However much you disagree, if they call it the A350XWB, that's what its name is.

I believe they formally refer to it as the A350, but just use the "A350XWB" for non-airline marketing materials. The Airbus website refers to the model as the A350 without "XWB", as does their presentations when referring to actual models, and not the family as a whole.

I will certainly call it whatever Airbus formally designates it, and right now, that looks like A350-xxxx.
 
dl767captain
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:51 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 8:56 am

i personally believe that the A350XWB and the original A350 are needed (2 separate aircraft). The A350XWB is an important plane that can compete with the 777 but i believe it should be called the A360. I also believe that getting rid of the original A350 is a mistake, I think the original A350 (maybe a little smaller) would be perfect to compete with the 788 and replace some of the a330's (there would be a few versions of the plane of course) maybe make the A350xwb-800 and turn that into the largest A350, while leaving the 900 and 1000 in the A360 line.
 
cygnuschicago
Posts: 518
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:34 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:52 pm

Quoting HB88 (Reply 23):
Strange. I hadn't heard of the A280 story before and it seems hard to believe it can have been anything more than a mistake. The naming conventions for the a/c series are pretty fixed. Eh well!

Stitch is probably correct in that it may have just been press speculation. The A280 moniker was reported on July 18, 2006 in the New York Times:

Quote:
Airbus thought of calling it the A280, a deliberate echo of the A380, the beleaguered giant that is the biggest passenger jet ever made. But the midsize plane it announced here Monday goes by the name A350 XWB - as in "extra-wide body."

Source: Mark Landler - The New York

Another, less reliable, source (loveindia.eu) has:

Quote:
Analysts had speculated that Airbus might rename the plane A370, to emphasize its new design. But people at the company said the second choice had been to call it A280 — a nod to its shared technology with the A380. In the end, though, Airbus merely added to its original name.
If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
 
dl021
Posts: 10836
Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:04 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Sat Jul 07, 2007 12:16 am

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
like someone in the States saying "VIN number".

AAARRGGGGHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

or ATM machine! STOP IT!!!

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 6):
eXactwy
Wike
Boeing

 rotfl  rotfl  rotfl  rotfl 

That's funny as hell.....


XWB... I can come up with several monikers but I just got warned about language and I'll just be cool about it...but they're pretty funny..... unless you're the type to get offended by the term whale-jet.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 30):
It's Airbus's choice what they call their aircraft. However much you disagree, if they call it the A350XWB, that's what its name is.

And it's our right to make fun of it if we choose!!!  Wink
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Sun Jul 08, 2007 1:53 pm

The funny thing about this is if you go to the ever trustworthy Wikipedia and you compare fuselage specs the A350XWB is five inches larger in diameter than the B787. Ole Swampgas says that his aircraft is very comfortable because of that five inches in 9 abreast seating and the B787 is marginal. All because of half an inch per seat, about a quarter inch on either side of my rear. Try it yourself sitting in your chair. Make a difference? I don't think so.

But if you look at cabin WIDTH, the B787 is five inches wider than the A350XWB. And both of them are a foot less than the B777, which is what we're now being told by the Emerald City is the real target of the A350XWB 900 and 1000.
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4820
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Sun Jul 08, 2007 2:08 pm

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
Am I the only one who finds the "A350XWB" name kind of ridiculous?

No.

Quoting MCIGuy (Thread starter):
"A360" would have sounded cool, kind of an indicator that "we've been around the block and now we're back".

Agreed.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 4):
I view it as a short-term marketing thing. The actual plane seems to be formally designated the A350, which is why I no longer append "XWB" when referring to it.

My guess is that the XWB thing will be quietly dropped sooner rather than later.

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 6):
eXactwy
Wike
Boeing

Boy, you had to struggle to make that work. And it's even less funny since it isn't true.

Quoting MIT787 (Reply 17):
Like A350XL

Ah, Fireball XL5...

Quoting HB88 (Reply 21):
I prefer 350 or 787.

Me too.

So what about the Trent XWB? That's gonna have to get a proper name sooner or later too.
 
iwok
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:35 pm

RE: "xwb" Nomenclature

Sun Jul 08, 2007 3:31 pm

Quoting Dougloid (Reply 6):
eXactwy
Wike
Boeing

Dude... That is rich in so many ways  bigthumbsup 

Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 12):
Since one of the biggest criticisms of the original A350 was that it was the same width as the A300/330/340, the XWB refers to the fact that they changed the fuselage, not that it's wider than any particular Boeing.

They should have called it the A3-AFIT-FITY (Airbus's First Interesting Twin Fuselage In Thirty Years)

Quoting Himself (Reply 15):
(I've read in places "XBW" and "WBX")

I think that the XB-350 is the best sounding application. It sounds supersonic and high tech.

-iwok

Who is online