NYC777
Topic Author
Posts: 5083
Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2004 3:00 am

Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 2:43 pm

That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23499
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:25 pm

Eh. He does himself no favors with the "he's biased to Boeing" crowd.

I do agree the 787's problems don't see as dire now as the A380's did, but then when the A380 was only expected to be six months late, that didn't seem so bad, either.

I also agree that despite the delays, the 787 is the only viable choice in the 200-250 seat market for the long-term.

I just don't see the 747-8I being competitive against the A380-800 on anything but price, and Boeing doesn't appear willing to lose money on an order to win it when they can let Airbus win it, but at minimal margins.

The A350-800 is likely not as poor a plane as he thinks, since it does cover the A330-300 and A340-300 market. I do agree with him that 8000nm range is not going to be critical for airlines - payload over range will be. If a 787-10 can haul a full load 7,000nm, it should be very palatable to airlines.

He seems to be taking the same tack with EK that many Boeing Boosters do - they expect EK to order the A350, so they have to spin the order to make it seem less important then it actually is.

And frequency/fragmentation will impact the market for 400+ seaters, but for those who must have them - even if it's only 300-400 units - the A380-800 is going to effectively win all those orders, IMO.
 
siromega
Posts: 564
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2005 11:57 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:29 pm

"Unlike most industry pretenders, Richard has a well-spirited reputation for calling things on the industry both sharply and accurately. Little wonder then, he is the de-facto industry Oracle."

Ugh...

Regardless of that type of dreck, the point about the 748F being the important part of the 748 program is right on. Given the collapse of the A380F (for now), the 748F and the upcoming 777F will capture most of the freight market. The passenger part of the 748 is just gravy. It works if they can hurt Airbus in the slightest way - stealing a few orders here and there, pricing pressures, etc.

[Edited 2007-10-15 08:33:09]
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 10107
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:50 pm

Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):
Rishard Aboulafia

Name change ?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Eh. He does himself no favors with the "he's biased to Boeing" crowd.

Well said Stitch, he lost his global independent appeal when he co authored "A "Shadow" Critical Project Appraisal: the A380 Program", trying to pass it off as independent comment, then to find out it was paid for by Boeing.

Every comment he makes about Airbus seems to be negative, and as you observed "he's biased to Boeing" crowd.

Like he previous said "The A380 is "somewhere between hubristic and outright folly," says aviation analyst Richard Aboulafia of The Teal Group, adding it could be relegated to "a footnote in aviation history.""

If he wants to be taken seriously outside the USA, drop lines like that, and this....

"Airbus really doesn't have the financial resources to do a true 400-seat plane until 2020, at the earliest. That assumes the A350 family gobbles up all available cash and engineering until 2015, and is followed by an A320 replacement. For the next 15 years, Airbus will sell the great albatross at whatever price it can realize."

and realise that with a order backlog at the end of last year at over 263 billion euros, and with more orders than ever likely this year, Airbus can afford to do many things.

It is a good day for Airbus, why trash it with such cheap talk. When the 787 rolled out Airbus sent Boeing a letter congratulating them about the achievement, a similar historical achievement happened today, and what I read looks like sour grapes.

As Enders said today, they are not out of the woods, but I think they have the momentum back going in the right direction.
We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13701
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 3:54 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
He does himself no favors with the "he's biased to Boeing" crowd.

You spotted that?  wink 

Indeed, simple opinion presented as fact (with absolutely no explanation) and out-and-out undisguised bias. I'm glad I wasn't the only one to read it like that.

Quote:
The -800 looks useless against the 787-8/9.



Quote:
Airbus will sell the great albatross



Quote:
But despite its tremendous success, Emirates is a government creation with unlimited funding
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:45 pm

Quote:
Little wonder then, he is the de-facto industry Oracle.

A little research into the past columns on Aboulafia's own website should easily dispel that myth.

Quote:
There are no other important programs that require pressing attention and siphon off financial and engineering resources. Airbus needs to worry about the A350 XWB and A400M. This is particularly true because the A350 DOES have enormous broad commercial appeal–already it has more orders than the A380 has received over a much longer time period Boeing can stay focused on its single most important project.

Hmm, single project? Has the 747-8 been canceled?

Quote:
One guy is in charge. Boeing might have needed to supervise some of its first tier suppliers a bit more closely, but they have the power to impose changes to the supply chain as they see fit. Airbus has two major power centers at the top who argue over work apportionment.

Work appointments for Boeing are obviously tied to the work shares and their distribution is from what I understand totally outside Boeing's control. The fact that factories inside Airbus can argue about the distribution means that Airbus has more flexibility, not less.

Quote:
BA will likely watch the 777NG/new design and A350-1000 battles play out

Spin spin spin. Boeing in that audio interview on Wallace's blog phrased it as if BA is almost begging them to put something into the ring. That "battle" seems to be very one-sided for the near future with Boeing not really interested in that fight.

Aboulafia:

Quote:
The -800 looks useless against the 787-8/9.

Boeing777 about Aboulafia:

Quote:
...analysts like Richard call the scene in the best and most neutral light possible.

 banghead 

Quote:
The biggest variable is engine performance, and that’s why they should try hard to get two competing engine providers.

Can't wait for him to reverse that statement when that A350-1000 competitor that he keeps talking about is presented with only one engine choice...

Quote:
Funny thing–Rolls makes good engines, but the only widebodies built with Rolls as a sole source have been disappointments on the market–L-1011 and A340-500/600.

Yeah, superstition is a core virtue for a market analyst.

Quote:
More importantly, when Boeing launches an all-new plane (once a decade), it gets it right. Everyone involved knows that sales will be at least 1,000, and usually more.

I wonder why they needed so many risk-sharing partners then. And why Randy I stated that they never expected the high sales they got now.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
He seems to be taking the same tack with EK that many Boeing Boosters do - they expect EK to order the A350, so they have to spin the order to make it seem less important then it actually is.

 checkmark 


Also the post is full of the 'Airbus had to discount heavily' / 'Boeing's products are in high demand' pricing speculation that quickly highlight the poster's biases. The idea that Aboulafia has insight into these aircraft deals is hard to believe. Especially after last year he discussed possible A380 cancellation scenarios while at the same time in the real world the same airlines were negotiating additional purchases.

I didn't comment on the 'questions' in that 'interview' as they are so loaded and biased that its really not worth it.
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:50 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
Well said Stitch, he lost his global independent appeal when he co authored "A "Shadow" Critical Project Appraisal: the A380 Program", trying to pass it off as independent comment, then to find out it was paid for by Boeing.

Every comment he makes about Airbus seems to be negative, and as you observed "he's biased to Boeing" crowd.

I don't think he is necessarily biased per se. It seems more that he will provide the quote that matches the audience. Since he more often provides quotes for US publications he will provide something that suits that news market. In a European publication he would certainly find more nuanced words towards Airbus and see Boeing's future challenges in a more critical light.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18419
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:57 pm

Quoting Wsp (Reply 6):
In a European publication he would certainly find more nuanced words towards Airbus and see Boeing's future challenges in a more critical light.

Not according to his comments about the A350 at the Paris Air Show, where he was constantly raising the bar for the aircraft.

(It's in the archives but I can't get "search" to work at the moment).

Every time orders for the aircraft met a goal that he had set, he set a new benchmark for it to achieve.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:58 pm

Quoting Mariner (Reply 7):
Every time orders for the aircraft met a goal that he had set, he set a new benchmark for it to achieve.

Yes, but IIRC that was in US publications.
 
User avatar
mariner
Posts: 18419
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2001 7:29 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:05 pm

Quoting Wsp (Reply 8):
Yes, but IIRC that was in US publications.

The articles containing the statements were printed in many UK and various European language newspapers.

It was the Paris Air Show - it received considerable international attention.

mariner
aeternum nauta
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:14 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):

The A350-800 is likely not as poor a plane as he thinks,

 checkmark ....I do think his comments were off on that.....
"Up the Irons!"
 
JAAlbert
Posts: 1567
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:43 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:23 pm

Who is the author of this editorial? I particularly love the objective, neutral questions he asks. Asking leading questions (questions which suggest how the responding party should answer) are not very helpful in assessing any situation, and certainly not helpful in understanding the facts on each side of the debates involving the 787, 350 and 380 programs.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:14 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 5):
Quote:
One guy is in charge. Boeing might have needed to supervise some of its first tier suppliers a bit more closely, but they have the power to impose changes to the supply chain as they see fit. Airbus has two major power centers at the top who argue over work apportionment.

Work appointments for Boeing are obviously tied to the work shares and their distribution is from what I understand totally outside Boeing's control.

Boeing has total control of the work share to Tier 1 suppliers. What they don't generally control is how the Tier 1's farm out their work to subcontractors, but they generally don't care either.

Quoting Wsp (Reply 5):
Quote:
More importantly, when Boeing launches an all-new plane (once a decade), it gets it right. Everyone involved knows that sales will be at least 1,000, and usually more.

I wonder why they needed so many risk-sharing partners then.

Risk-sharing isn't really about risk sharing...neither A nor B can afford to have a commercial airplane program actually fail. It's all about cost-sharing...heavy "risk-sharing" allows both A & B to develop new aircraft with a lot less money out of their own pockets (good for shareholders) and also ties their suppliers much more closely to the program, which is good for long-term support.

Tom.
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:32 am

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 12):
Boeing has total control of the work share to Tier 1 suppliers. What they don't generally control is how the Tier 1's farm out their work to subcontractors, but they generally don't care either.

They lost control when they made the subcontractors risk-sharing partners. Boeing can't take away work from one of these partners and give it to someone else. Airbus can for example move A380 work from Hamburg to Toulouse if that makes more sense.

Aboulafia was playing down Boeing's 787 organizational issues and to distract pulled out a silly and unrelated comparison to Airbus' work organization.

What is more interesting in the context of Boeing's 787 troubles is that the processes inside the suppliers seem to be partially in-transparent to Boeing. This is fine unless you suddenly have traveled work where your suppliers and your processes are getting intertwined in unplanned ways (for example when it comes to documentation).

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 12):
Risk-sharing isn't really about risk sharing...neither A nor B can afford to have a commercial airplane program actually fail. It's all about cost-sharing...heavy "risk-sharing" allows both A & B to develop new aircraft with a lot less money out of their own pockets (good for shareholders)

Risk-sharing is cost-sharing is risk-sharing. There is no either or. If Boeing was guaranteed (in the way Aboulafia puts it) to sell 1000 pcs of the 787 they would have sought financing that would have left more profits in their accounts.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 12):
and also ties their suppliers much more closely to the program, which is good for long-term support.

Profit is what binds partners, not past investments. Suppliers who waste tears over spilled milk from a decade ago don't stay in business for long.
 
hloutweg
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 10:57 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:55 am

Quote:

There are no other important programs that require pressing attention and siphon off financial and engineering resources. Airbus needs to worry about the A350 XWB and A400M. This is particularly true because the A350 DOES have enormous broad commercial appeal–already it has more orders than the A380 has received over a much longer time period

The comparison is fair as it is true that the A350 has gained more sales than the A380. But the markets are different and they do not compare. Besides, under normal conditions, meaning that no upsets had happen to the A380, Airbus would have counted several more orders already; orders that have been held back still and could very easily go to the A380 vs 747 in a most fair tete-a-tete. Comparing the number of contracts of the A350 vs the A380 almost as dramatically incorrect as comparing the number of sales toilet paper vs trouffles.

Mr. Aboulafia is clearly inclined to one side, and one side only, and using arguments that seems to be 'fair' in use while inherently conflicting, is a foxy way to go around his bias.
In Varietate Concordia
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13701
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:27 am

This comment was also telling - not so much what he said, but what he didn't say:

Quote:
There are no other important programs that require pressing attention and siphon off financial and engineering resources. Airbus needs to worry about the A350 XWB and A400M. ... Boeing can stay focused on its single most important project.

Implying that all Boeing has to work on is the 787 (not that they don't have challenges there), while totally neglecting the 748 and 767 tankers (again a project with some challenges).

Personally, I would say Boeing has as much on its plate right now as Airbus does. Despite the rabid desire of the fanboyz here for Boeing to announce "an Airbus killing Y1", I believe neither Airbus nor Boeing is in the slightest bit interested in this segment right now. Just look at the incredibly strong sales of the A320 and 737 families to see why there is no pressure on either right now.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
distanthorizon
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:48 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:09 am

This guy has much less credibility than the vast majority of a-net users.

The reasons are already clearly stated.

His "independent" comments do not deserve any of our time.

DH
Regards
Nelson SE
 
User avatar
Putnik
Posts: 94
Joined: Sat Aug 04, 2007 2:35 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:04 am

Call me ignorant but who is Richard Aboulafia? And why is he important? He pops up in a.net topics and suddenly a discussion gets ignited.
LH504 - we always remember our first :)
 
Flying-Tiger
Posts: 3925
Joined: Mon Aug 23, 1999 5:35 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:23 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 15):
Despite the rabid desire of the fanboyz here for Boeing to announce "an Airbus killing Y1", I believe neither Airbus nor Boeing is in the slightest bit interested in this segment right now.

IMO there is another factor in here: sooner or later sales will go back drastically and there is the risk that many orders might be cancelled - at that might exactly be the window when a possible A320NG or Y1 might appear on the market. Taking cancellations for these new birds will realy hurt, taking a cancellation for an A320 or a B737NG will urt far less - both lines have been written down and essentially everything above variable costs makes fun. It is far easier to run a written down line during a downturn than a new line where you still need to recoup the investment.

Thus I think that both Airbus and Boeing will only launch their new narrowbodies when a slump is apparent to have them both available once orders pick up again.
Flown: A319/320/321,A332/3,A380,AT4,AT7,B732/3/4/5/7/8,B742/4,B762/763,B772,CR2,CR7,ER4,E70,E75,F50/70,M11,L15,S20
 
col
Posts: 1695
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 2:12 pm

Funny thing–Rolls makes good engines, but the only widebodies built with Rolls as a sole source have been disappointments on the market–L-1011 and A340-500/600.


This guy seems to be a legend in his own mind, and in the mind of the interviewer!! Think we can all see that he has a slight negative to Airbus in this interview. The RR comment blows me away, especially when they have handed PW/GE their asses in a lot of competitions, and even a child could explain to him why the L-1011 and 345/346 did not compete so well. I live in PW country, and I know who they fear the most on competitive projects!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23499
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:00 pm

Quoting Putnik (Reply 17):
Call me ignorant but who is Richard Aboulafia? And why is he important? He pops up in a.net topics and suddenly a discussion gets ignited.

He's a senior analyst for the Teal Group, which is an aircraft industry consulting company based out of Virginia. He's been following Boeing and Airbus for decades, but during the past decade, has been mostly critical in his view of Airbus and favorable in his view of Boeing, so Airbus Aficionados dislike him and Boeing Boosters like him.

His counterpart on the Airbus side is Scott Leeham of leeham.net. His general tone of late is favorable towards Airbus and critical of Boeing, so the AA's like him and the BB's dislike him.

When either one makes a comment, it is immediate grist for the airliners.net mill.  Smile
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:02 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Eh. He does himself no favors with the "he's biased to Boeing" crowd.


Quoting DistantHorizon (Reply 16):
His "independent" comments do not deserve any of our time.

Well said.  checkmark 

[Edited 2007-10-16 08:06:00]
 
WINGS
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:36 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:09 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 20):

His counterpart on the Airbus side is Scott Leeham of leeham.net. His general tone of late is favorable towards Airbus and critical of Boeing, so the AA's like him and the BB's dislike him.

I see a huge difference between the two. While Aboulafia is just plain biased, Leeham is more open minded towards both Airbus and Boeing.

Aboulafia has lost nearly all credibility as an independent analyst. He might as well go work for the Boeing PR department.

Regards,
Wings
Aviation Is A Passion.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23499
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:15 pm

Quoting WINGS (Reply 22):
I see a huge difference between the two. While Aboulafia is just plain biased, Leeham is more open minded towards both Airbus and Boeing.

Yes, Leeham is less pontificating then Aboulafia, but when he talks, BB's get about as bent out of shape as AA's do when Aboulafia speaks.

Hence I generally approach both with a healthy sense of skepticism. There is wheat amongst the chaff, but you need to thresh pretty hard to find it.  Smile
 
Danny
Posts: 3714
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:51 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
Quoting WINGS (Reply 22):
I see a huge difference between the two. While Aboulafia is just plain biased, Leeham is more open minded towards both Airbus and Boeing.

Yes, Leeham is less pontificating then Aboulafia, but when he talks, BB's get about as bent out of shape as AA's do when Aboulafia speaks.

Hence I generally approach both with a healthy sense of skepticism.

Check how balance comments Leeham published on 787 delays.
 
baron95
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:19 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 3:52 pm

In 1999 it looked like the .com/telco/stock market boom was going to be going on forever.

In 2005 it looked like the US real estate boom was going to be going on forever.

In 2007 it looks like the commercial airliner order boom is going to be going on forever.

IT WILL NOT.

When the next downturn in orders does happen, there will be lots of deferred orders and cancelations. EK, QR and the likes will be over represented in cancelations. A380 and other VLAs will also be over represented in cancelations, as they always are.

All this is to say that Airbus star performers A350-1000/A380 and their EK/QR mega-orders featured in the article are very risky.

On the other end, 787-8/9/10 order rebound from US airliners are still to come.

I say that even with the diapointing 787 delay, and let's face it, it is disapointing, Boeing still has a much better backlog. The stock market clearly sees it that way.
Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
 
col
Posts: 1695
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 2:11 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 4:48 pm

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 25):
In 1999 it looked like the .com/telco/stock market boom was going to be going on forever.

, plus the rest of your reply.


WTF. Red Sox lost again even I am not this depressed. Isn't this just a repeat of what you have written elsewhere, its getting boring, and does not seem to have anything to do with this topic. We can all see that you have no respect for the 380 or Airbus, but unless you are Alan Greenspan, am not too concerned with your end of the developed world as we know it outbursts!
 
baron95
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:19 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:06 pm

Quoting Col (Reply 26):
and does not seem to have anything to do with this topic.

Huh? Topic is his comments on the A380 and 787 and how he feels the challenges for the A380 are in a different league. One thing that no-one has pointed out is that A380s sold 185 copies in the middle of the largest boom ever in long haul aircraft orders. It will not last forever. A and B orders will come down from 2000+/year level of 05/06/07. If a plane has not made a killing in this market, it is not likely to make it in any other time.

It sounds to me like you are depressed. I'm just making a comentary. I have no personal stake on this fight. I like the A380. I wish there was a large market for it. I like the Concorde (a lot). As one that flies ove 150K miles/year, I'd love if all long haul airliners were M2+ 30 years after the Concorde entered service. But air transport is a dollars and sense business. It is not the make believe world of prestige and hot-pants/mini-skirt FAs anymore. (which is too bad, but is reality).

In that world, the A380 is exposed. The smallest long-haul airliner that has the range and competitive CASM is much better position. Even the mighty 747 got its wings clippend in many markets (e.g. Transatlantic) by the lowly 767 flying with the same technology and the same engines. Go figure.
Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23499
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 5:13 pm

Quoting Baron95 (Reply 27):
One thing that no-one has pointed out is that A380s sold 185 copies in the middle of the largest boom ever in long haul aircraft orders.

I would be interested to see how 747-400 passenger family orders tracked during the last airliner boom. Her strongest year appears to be 1990.
 
baron95
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:19 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:08 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 28):
I would be interested to see how 747-400 passenger family orders tracked during the last airliner boom. Her strongest year appears to be 1990.

Indeed. And you must also note that during that time the only other viable option for the Pacific long haul routes (were the 744 was selling into) was the A340. There were no twins available for transpacific. The A330/767 didn't have the range (for the most part) and the 777 didn't exist.

In the 1999/2000 boomlet, with the 777 availble the story was much different and the 774 (even with the ER) didn't sell well.

In a 2000+ airliner/year era (2005-2007) , how many copies did the A380 sell? (Net 35?). When we go down to 900 airliners/year era or an era where A350s, 77W/Ls and 787-9/10ERs are readily available how many would it sell?

And when the A388 is done flying passengers where does it go? 707s became tankers, DC-8s became freighters. DC-10s became tankers and freighters. MD-11 becames freighters. 747s became very desirable freighters. Where will the A380s go? Can't make a decent freighter out of the thing. Third world airliners can't fill the thing. Except for the odd charter operation, where wll they go?

I know it is a silly comparisson, but would you buy a car or a house if you could not easily resell it?
Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
 
swallow
Posts: 182
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 12:23 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:34 pm

Quote from the article, 'I’m hearing news that the A350-1000 may yet go the way of the A340-600 and fall short on projected performance promises'

Aviation Week recently reported that Airbus had reduced the thrust rating for the Trent XWB for the 3510 from 95,000 lb to 92,000 lb with MTOW at 295t because of better than expected low-speed performance. That does not sound like a failure to meet performance guarantees.
The grass is greener where you water it
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23499
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:54 pm

Quoting Swallow (Reply 30):
Quote from the article, 'I’m hearing news that the A350-1000 may yet go the way of the A340-600 and fall short on projected performance promises'

Aviation Week recently reported that Airbus had reduced the thrust rating for the Trent XWB for the 3510 from 95,000 lb to 92,000 lb with MTOW at 295t because of better than expected low-speed performance. That does not sound like a failure to meet performance guarantees.

Well the nominal range for the A350-1000 has been shrinking even as MTOW has been rising, so Richard may have a point.

Also, the drop in engine thrust needed for take-off doesn't necessarily mean that the thrust needed for cruise dropped off any (though it stands to reason it very well could), which is what primarily drives the range and payload-over-range equations since the plane can only tank so much "cruise fuel".
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:11 pm

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):
If he wants to be taken seriously outside the USA, drop lines like that, and this....

"Airbus really doesn't have the financial resources to do a true 400-seat plane until 2020, at the earliest. That assumes the A350 family gobbles up all available cash and engineering until 2015, and is followed by an A320 replacement. For the next 15 years, Airbus will sell the great albatross at whatever price it can realize."

What's wrong about that, other than one might differ on the long-term prospects of the A380?

Quoting Zeke (Reply 3):


and realise that with a order backlog at the end of last year at over 263 billion euros, and with more orders than ever likely this year, Airbus can afford to do many things.

A popular fallacy. An order backlog like this may actually be a tremendous burden if you can't get unit cost down to a level that provides a decent margin.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6406
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:19 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 31):
Also, the drop in engine thrust needed for take-off doesn't necessarily mean that the thrust needed for cruise dropped off any (though it stands to reason it very well could), which is what primarily drives the range and payload-over-range equations since the plane can only tank so much "cruise fuel".

It doesn't. But if achieving a range/payload was the objective, then the MTOW would rise until the necessary fuel could be "tanked".
I find it inconceivable that the available thrust would be reduced, if the range/payload objectives weren't likely to be met.

Of course it could be due to the other conspiracy theory - namely that RR are incapable of designing a clean-sheet 95 000lb thrust engine for a clean-sheet airliner. Somewhat surprised not to see this one mentioned in the interview....

Quoting Stitch (Reply 31):
Well the nominal range for the A350-1000 has been shrinking even as MTOW has been rising, so Richard may have a point.

Presumably this would place the 787 firmly in the A340-600 category too, as it too, has seen range reductions....

Richard also BTW overlooks the fact that the extra "weight" of the A380, relative to its competitors, is almost completely driven by a huge wing (which is there for a reason..).
If the A380 had a wing span/wing loading commensurate in scale with the 748i, its entirely possible that a good 20t might be removed from the OEW, giving pretty much parity with the 748i in terms of OEW per seat (or per sq.metre).

Given that unlike the 748i, the A380 is a) the shrink version, and b) has a good 55t-60t of MTOW growth built in, achieving that OEW ratio with a conventional aluminium construction is a monumental achievement IMO
But of course, only on A-net do airliners NOT have wings (one wonders if Richard is a member?  Smile ).

Richard might have considered pointing out that the OEW of the 787-3 sucks compared to the A300. Of course in reality the exact same logic applies - this time in favour of the 787-3.

Like you, I fail to understand his comments regarding the A350-800.
As far as I can see, it is way the most popular A350 model to be ordered to date, positioned squarely amongst its existing 787 competition (unlike the A350-900 and -1000, which at this time, don't have direct 787 competition).

The above of course, could well be seen to confirm the validity of the positioning of the 787 in the marketplace....  Wink

How it looks "useless" against the 787-8/9 is a complete mystery to me...
I'm sure all will become clear in time...

Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
There is wheat amongst the chaff, but you need to thresh pretty hard to find it.

 checkmark 
That's the irritating thing.
His comments regarding more expensive airliner orders being more vulnerable in a downturn, and the 787 with 45 or so customers, and no great reliance on any one, being in a very good defensive position, have to have some merit.

Demonstrably, the guy knows how to play to an audience.

Regards
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23499
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Aboulafia's Comments On A380 And 787

Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:26 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 33):
Presumably this would place the 787 firmly in the A340-600 category too, as it too, has seen range reductions....

Yup. And the 787-9 saw a serious MTOW boost, herself, to the current 540,000lbs.

I wasn't implying that it's necessarily a "bad" thing that MTOW is rising and range is dropping. The A350XWB is a physically larger plane then the original A350, so MTOW naturally would rise as would MEW, even with newer, lighter materials. And the A350-1000 is still good for 8000+ nm.

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos