SInGAPORE_AIR
Posts: 11619
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2000 4:06 am

B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Fri Nov 30, 2007 10:59 pm

"So it is too early for us to rush off and start to get in a panic about having to spend a bunch of money for improvements to the 777.''


- Marty Bentrott, Boeing's VP of jetliner sales for Middle East and Africa

More at James Wallace's blog via the Seattle P-I.
Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:58 pm

He has a point. The A350-1000 does not enter service until 2015. Sure it will kill of the 773ER, but not for another 5 or 6 years.

I think the notion of updating the 777 is a waste of money. Boeing should press ahead with the HGW versions of the 787 in a few years.
 
Cubsrule
Posts: 11516
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:13 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:03 am



Quoting EI321 (Reply 1):
Sure it will kill of the 773ER, but not for another 5 or 6 years.

Will it? Loyal Airbus customers continued (and continue) to buy the 32x family after the superior 73G came out. Loyal Boeing customers continued to buy the 767 after the superior 330 came out. When you beat your competitor to market, that gives you a very definite advantage, even if your competitor has a superior airplane.
I can't decide whether I miss the tulip or the bowling shoe more
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:17 am

The A350 will no way kill off the 77W but it'll reduce orders to a trickle I believe and boeing shouldn't worry about it. the T7 will be 20 years past EIS and then is probably about the time to start developing a replacement. I think with how successful boeing has been with the 787 and with airbus' bad times with the A380 delays and what have you the Airbus fanboys have thought they have put the wind up boeing, so much so did they think this that boeing peeps sort of blieved it as well and and had a bit of a panic and all of a sudden have realised that it'll just be living out its "natuaral life" anyway. congrats to boeing for not getting too scared about their current cash cow.

Fred
Image
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4991
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:23 am

There's just been another thread discussing whether a move to 10Y and whatever efficiency and weight improvements are reasonably possible will allow the 777-300ER to retain some measure of competitiveness with the A350-1000. This is a.net -- no one agreed. Big grin

You'd have to have access to way more numbers than most of us do in order to answer the question "Would an updated 777-300ER, a 787-10/11HGW, a new wider Y3, or some combination of the above give Boeing the best return on investment?" with any degree of certainty. My uninformed intuition tells me to agree with EI321 -- the 787HGW concept has the most promise. Two lengths (-10 and -11), with >6000 nm MZFW range, and the ability to make a 787-8LR or -9LR for those few cargo-heavy ULH or super-ULH missions. (This would also allow for a 787-9F which would truly be a heavy-lift beast.  weightlifter  )

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Airbus customers continued (and continue) to buy the 32x family after the superior 73G came out.

You better  duck  . The 737NG is an excellent airplane and competitive with the A320 series. Each has strengths and weaknesses. Many Airbus fans will have no trouble reminding you that the 737NG is certainly not unambiguously superior.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 1552
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:34 am



Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 4):
and the ability to make a 787-8LR or -9LR for those few cargo-heavy ULH or super-ULH missions. (This would also allow for a 787-9F which would truly be a heavy-lift beast. weightlifter )

Would that be super-ultra-long-haul, how about some SUMLH that would be super ultra mega long haul  Silly

seriously though, I don't think boeing will ever do the -11, it will already incur some penalties with strengthening the fuselage for the -10 and i think the benefits simply wont be there for the -11 (assuming approx same stretch from the 9-10 as 10-11). The only way i can see boeing doing it is if many airports become slot restricted and they optimize it for 3-4000nm

Fred
Image
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 1:34 am

Boeing's response will be dictated by the market.

There have been roughly 2200 A333, A340, 777 and 747 planes sold to date. One can reasonably expect that number to reach 2500.

Of that 2500, Airbus has sold 200 A380s and 400 A350s in rounded numbers. With options, that would be 250 and 500 in rounded numbers. If we assume all 150 787-9s are tasked to A333/A343/772 replacements, that would be 900 planes. Assume 100 787 options are there, and now we're at 1000.

So that leaves around 1500 planes for Boeing and Airbus to go after. Under former program goals, that would be enough for Boeing to launch a $10 billion Y3 if they felt they could snag two-thirds of the market (and I think they could). On the flip side, a $5 billion 787HGW that scored even half of the remaining sales would pencil out to be a better investment.

Of course, we're just discussing straight replacements. Then there are expansion orders.

Again, the Y3 would likely do very well here and have better percentages then the 787HGW.

So winning two-thirds of a 3600 order market would be better then winning half. Adding in those extra 600 sales might just push the numbers in favor of Y3...
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4991
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 1:47 am



Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
Again, the Y3 would likely do very well here and have better percentages then the 787HGW.

You may have already answered why you think this in an earlier thread, but I am still not sure I understand it. What would a wider Y3 bring to the table that a 787HGW wouldn't, except for the ability to reach higher passenger capacity at the larger sizes? A 787-11 could reach slightly higher passenger numbers than a 777-300ER, and we've seen from the 747-8I and A380 experience that the market for even larger planes is problematic at best. Most of what market there is has likely been claimed by the A380 for the next 20 years.

Wide Y3 might have better structural efficiency than a really long 787, but at the expense of volumetric efficiency. The extra width doesn't help load more cargo, and the plane starts getting really heavy if you try to do anything significant with the extra crown space.

Either plane will need an engine that doesn't exist today, but a Trent XWB variant could power an HGW 787 more easily than a wide Y3. A wide twin Y3, especially if made large enough to replace the 747-8I in its largest size, would need all-new engines.

I agree that a wide Y3 would be successful and nice to see. I just don't yet understand why it would gain enough extra orders versus an HGW 787 to be worth the much higher investment.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 1:48 am



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Airbus customers continued (and continue) to buy the 32x family after the superior 73G came out.

The 73G isn't really superior. The A32x and the 737NG are about as equal (from an airline's point of view) as it's possible for two different airplanes in the same market space to be. There are particular metrics where Boeing wins, particular ones where Airbus wins, but on balance it's basically a dead heat.

Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Boeing customers continued to buy the 767 after the superior 330 came out.

I think this is a better example. It's more reflective of the technology and performance gap between the 777 and the A350.

Tom.
 
User avatar
seabosdca
Posts: 4991
Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:33 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 1:54 am



Quoting Flipdewaf (Reply 5):
Would that be super-ultra-long-haul, how about some SUMLH that would be super ultra mega long haul  

Otherwise known as "SYD-LHR" or, after about another decade of growth in Brazil, "GRU-NRT."  Wink  Silly
 
baron95
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:19 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 2:29 am

Excuse me for asking, but how many firm A350-1000 orders does Airbus have? Is it 40? And how many 77W orders has gotten since the Airbus started taking orders for the A350-1000? Is it 80?

Is the 77W outselling the A350-1000 2 to 1?

And that is such a critical problem for Boeing, how?
Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:11 am



Quoting Singapore_Air (Thread starter):
"So it is too early for us to rush off and start to get in a panic about having to spend a bunch of money for improvements to the 777.'

It is fine not to get into a panic, but DO rush off and spend some money on upping your game. Otherwise you know what happens Boeing........ Airbus comes and bites you in the tush.

Early bird catches the worm. I remember when Airbus decided to bet on it's product range to see it through the sales race. Didn't work.

What Boeing need do is work on new wing for 787-10 +11 ala Airbus 345 and 346. Tweak T7 to freshen up the stale line.
 
pygmalion
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:25 am



Quoting EbbUK (Reply 11):
What Boeing need do is work on new wing for 787-10 +11 ala Airbus 345 and 346. Tweak T7 to freshen up the stale line.

bad analogy I think. A345,346 are not the best stretch examples IMHO.
 
User avatar
distanthorizon
Posts: 207
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 4:48 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:08 am



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Airbus customers continued (and continue) to buy the 32x family after the superior 73G came out.

You are certainly one of the first guys who says an 73G e better than an 32x!

Even Airlliners who have opted for the 73X wouldn't say it - just that it better suits their needs...

Not an A vs B thing. But you could more easily state the oposite. Orders would back you up.

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 8):
Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Boeing customers continued to buy the 767 after the superior 330 came out.

I think this is a better example. It's more reflective of the technology and performance gap between the 777 and the A350.

 checkmark 

DH
Regards
Nelson SE
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1769
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:11 am



Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 7):
A wide twin Y3, especially if made large enough to replace the 747-8I in its largest size, would need all-new engines.

 checkmark  and a new engine in the 130 klbs range would be quite expensive to develop-- possibly prohibitively so: the larger the airplane, the fewer are sold, and only two per airframe at that!

Here's hoping for the return of the trijet Big grin
 
iwok
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:35 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:34 am



Quoting DistantHorizon (Reply 13):
You are certainly one of the first guys who says an 73G e better than an 32x!

I think the 737 is slightly lighter, slightly faster, burns slightly less fuel and flies slightly farther. Of course its slightly more expensive. So they're pretty damn close to each other, that operationally it seems as there is no real cost difference.

iwok
 
Ken777
Posts: 9061
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:51 am

I tend to agree that Boeing isn't in a panic tight now. There are probably engineers looking at bits & pieces that will improve performance, just as they have in the past. There will also be some rather detailed discussions going on with some good customers.

But there is no need to make any rapid decisions before Boeing has all of its ducks lined up in a row. First they need to know what the 350-1000 will end up being, then what comes out of discussions with customers and what comes out of engineering. Finally, if the engine companies deliver on engines for Y1 there is the potential of moving that to market while Airbus is spending R&D resources (money and engineers) on the 350 program.

Boeing has some time to watch the game play out and when they move I believe that it will be a profitable move for them and their customers.
 
olle
Posts: 513
Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:30 am

remember thet th 737 RS is expected in this time range. A 777NG would be more simple in order to handle the resources and I consider that the mid management fight hard with the top management to get funding for both 737RS AND 777RS. This was the problem Airbus had a few years ago with 350, 380 and M400
 
mestrugo
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 5:07 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:41 am

They should have kept the MD-11 into production! That way, they can say that the triple seven, the A330 and the A350 are all superior aircraft, but that three-hore is a much cooler-looking airplane.  Smile

Just kidding, as usual!  Smile
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13471
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 10:41 am



Quoting Stitch (Reply 6):
There have been roughly 2200 A333, A340, 777 and 747 planes sold to date. One can reasonably expect that number to reach 2500.

Yes, but don't both Airbus and Boeing see the sub-VLA market at 6,000+ over the next 25 years? So, they seem to think there's more to play for there than you do.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
PlunaCRJ
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:05 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:06 am



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Airbus customers continued (and continue) to buy the 32x family after the superior 73G came out

As said before, my general perception is that the A32S is slightly better than the 737NG...

Quoting EI321 (Reply 1):
Boeing should press ahead with the HGW versions of the 787 in a few years.

That would be nice, but remember that the 787 is optimized on its original size... nobody would want to stretch a wonderfull plane and get a sub-optimal one in the end.

Quoting EbbUK (Reply 11):
What Boeing need do is work on new wing for 787-10 +11 ala Airbus 345 and 346. Tweak T7 to freshen up the stale line.

I don´t think Boeing wants to have an equivalent to the A340-600 in the stretched 787...


What Boeing should do is to stay calm, kind of forget about the 777-300ER market and concentrate on the wonderfull product they have right now: the 787 Dreamliner.
 
User avatar
glideslope
Posts: 1423
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 8:06 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:28 am



Quoting Ken777 (Reply 16):
Finally, if the engine companies deliver on engines for Y1 there is the potential of moving that to market while Airbus is spending R&D resources (money and engineers) on the 350 program.

Agreed, and in the 160-190 seat range also.
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
 
Rj111
Posts: 3007
Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:02 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 11:55 am



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Boeing customers continued to buy the 767 after the superior 330 came out.

That's a much better example then the A320 vs 737 as like many other have mentioned there is little difference between the two.

However I don't have any figures but i'm willing to bet that there were very few new 767 customers in the years after the A332. Partly because there already were a lot of 767 customers, and partly because there was a better offering (in many cases) available. A similar thing will probably happen with the 773ER, airlines that already have such an aircraft within their fleet, will likely continue to order it as introducing the A350 may mean too many family types. What will keep the 773ER going is Boeings ability to offer it for less - as they have already covered R&D costs, and can essentially 'milk' the product like airbus have been doing with the A330 recently. And keep it competitive. It's a sensible business strategy.
 
2175301
Posts: 727
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 11:19 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:31 pm

Boeing probably has 2 to 3 years before they realistically have to make a decision on which way to go with the 777 or its replacement.

Market conditions do change, and technology changes as well.

I think it is in Boeing's best interest to wait those 2 to 3 years and see what plays out and what engine technology would likely be available for either an upgraded 777 or a replacement product. That would also allow them to much better understand the technology and any issues with the 787.
 
caljn
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:37 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:44 pm



Quoting PlunaCRJ (Reply 20):
As said before, my general perception is that the A32S is slightly better than the 737NG...

Others have made this contention with the same tone of certainty. But what is the evidence?
Or is this a case of ..."if we say it oftern enough it has to be true!"

What are the criteria for saying the 32S is better than the 737NG? Personal opinion? If "better" is based on operation costs, than it is difficult to say one is superior than the other.

Many people say the 320 is quiet, which to them makes it better.
I say the flying experience on the 737 is infinetly more fun and interesting. In my opinion, better!
 
PlunaCRJ
Posts: 301
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2007 8:05 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 12:54 pm



Quoting Caljn (Reply 24):
What are the criteria for saying the 32S is better than the 737NG? Personal opinion?

Not personal opinion, neither facts. It is the perception I have of the aircraft.
 
ebbuk
Posts: 844
Joined: Thu May 11, 2006 6:47 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 1:44 pm



Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 12):
bad analogy I think. A345,346 are not the best stretch examples IMHO

I got that. However, what I see is that the Dreamliner is great for it's market and can be amazing as a T7 replacement. All that is missing is a new wing to give the bigger planes the same range or more.
 
Boeing74741R
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:44 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 1:59 pm



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):

Will it? Loyal Airbus customers continued (and continue) to buy the 32x family after the superior 73G came out.

How is it superior? Compared to the 737 Classics then yes it is a superior jet, but if the 737NG was superior then the order book would've been even more sold out by now! The only thing from the top of my head that the 737NG is superior vs the A320 Family is probably the range and that's it.

Compared to the A320 the 737NG...

*Doesn't offer fly-by-wire technology
*Does not have as much cabin space (ok we're talking small numbers here but you can feel the difference in seat width and headroom)
*Basic fuselage design is based on the 707 from the 1950s!!!

Therefore I don't believe for one minute that the 737NG is superior than the A320 Family, as they both cancel each other's benefits out to offer an aircraft that any airline could choose to meet their short-haul needs and basically go for the one that is offering the best price (in some cases).

As for me I prefer A320s but that's for another day.

A better example of comparing a superior product is the A330 versus the 767.
 
User avatar
GrahamHill
Posts: 2958
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 6:35 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 2:24 pm



Quoting Caljn (Reply 24):

Many people say the 320 is quiet, which to them makes it better.

True. And that's one of the reasons why I prefer to fly in a 320.

Quoting Caljn (Reply 24):
I say the flying experience on the 737 is infinetly more fun and interesting. In my opinion, better!

Would you give me more details? I don't see clearly the "fun" and "interesting" part in flying in a 737 (or a 320).

Thanks  Smile
"A learned fool is more foolish than an ignorant one" - Moliere
 
worldrider
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 2:27 pm



Quoting Cubsrule (Reply 2):
Loyal Airbus customers continued (and continue) to buy the 32x family after the superior 73G came out

superior? in what way?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 2:52 pm

Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 7):
What would a wider Y3 bring to the table that a 787HGW wouldn't, except for the ability to reach higher passenger capacity at the larger sizes? (W)e've seen from the 747-8I and A380 experience that the market for even larger planes is problematic at best.

One wonders how well the A380-800 would be selling if it weighed 25% less and burned 25% less fuel...

Quote:
Wide Y3 might have better structural efficiency than a really long 787, but at the expense of volumetric efficiency. The extra width doesn't help load more cargo, and the plane starts getting really heavy if you try to do anything significant with the extra crown space.

And yet the plane does not need to be a perfect circle. Yes, that is the easiest structure to pressurize, but monolithic CFRP should give us some options. Move to an ovoid shape with flatter walls to allow for more passenger headroom at the windows and that lessens the crown space. Move more systems conduit up there, freeing more space down below. You might be able to create a taller underfloor bay that is still two LD3s wide to allow taller standard pallets, improving cargo capacity and yields.

Quote:
Either plane will need an engine that doesn't exist today, but a Trent XWB variant could power an HGW 787 more easily than a wide Y3. A wide twin Y3, especially if made large enough to replace the 747-8I in its largest size, would need all-new engines.

Just because an Al-paneled four-holer weights 500 metric tons doesn't mean a CFRP monolithic barrel twin has to.

The 77W has an MTOW of 352mt. An A350-1000's is supposed to be 295mt. That means Boeing could have a Y3 that was 15% heavier and still use GE90-115Bs for all flight envelopes.

Quote:
I agree that a wide Y3 would be successful and nice to see. I just don't yet understand why it would gain enough extra orders versus an HGW 787 to be worth the much higher investment.

Because it would be in a class above the A350XWB instead of the same class.

It would also be a more effective and efficient VLA then the 747-8I or the A380-800 where slot restrictions were not paramount (and even then, it might still work out better) even in a 425 seat maximum model.

And you need to look at the 20-year market. Airbus Aficionados keep pointing to world air travel rising 5% per annum in perpetuity to explain why the world will need 1000 A380-800s. Well, if air travel is going to rise forever, then they're going to need bigger planes across the board, won't they?

So if Boeing can offer a larger plane then Airbus, what are the world's airlines going to buy?

Over the last 20 years, that extra seat per row the 777 has had over the A340 has served it well because world air traffic has grown over that time and that extra seat helps lower the cost of flying folks and increasing the amount of money you make doing so.

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 19):
Yes, but don't both Airbus and Boeing see the sub-VLA market at 6,000+ over the next 25 years? So, they seem to think there's more to play for there than you do.

And yet both feel that the world needs 1500 747-8Is and A380-800s.

Still, I did note the 2500 was pure replacement. So that leaves room for expansion (which I used 3600 because it was easier to divide by three). And then that 6000 unit figure also includes 1000 767s and 500 A332s, plus a few hundred A300s and A310s and even a handful of 747-200s, DC-10s and MD-11s...



The 787HGW is the quick, easy, and cheap way for Boeing to address the 300-400 seat market.

But so was the A340 for Airbus...

Boeing spent the money to do it better, even if it took longer and cost more. And they reaped the rewards.

Airbus has done the same with the A350XWB (vs. the original plan of A345E/A346E). And they too, look to be reaping the rewards.

I don't think Boeing needs to settle for the same, if the market is willing to embrace something more.


And finally, let's keep this thread on the 777 and A350XWB and not the 737NG and A320, okay?

[Edited 2007-12-01 06:57:10]
 
caljn
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 9:37 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:42 pm



Quoting GrahamHill (Reply 28):
Would you give me more details? I don't see clearly the "fun" and "interesting" part in flying in a 737 (or a 320).

Agreed. One would never describe the 320 experience as fun...more like an evening by the fire with a good book.
The 737 conversely, which I fly on Southwest and always in the rear, because I can't deal with the jockeying for position with the open seating.

I challenge you to a seat in the aft cabin of a Southwest 737 and not find it interesting!
The roar of the engines at departure, then the constant whooshing sound in flight...the visceral feeling of flying, even in the smoothest of conditions. The 737 feels as if it enjoys it's mission of transporting you and is determined to show you its stuff. The 320, I might as well be sleeping in my bed.

Perhaps a few pilots could weigh in if there is a fun factor!
 
Boeing74741R
Posts: 787
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:44 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:50 pm



Quoting Caljn (Reply 31):
Agreed. One would never describe the 320 experience as fun...more like an evening by the fire with a good book.

Comes in very useful if you've been up since 3am that morning for a flight with an A320 Family a/c, you can fall asleep without being woken up.
 
popski777
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 4:12 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:56 pm

I think Boeing should press ahead with a 787-10HGW but not a -11. Boeing should leave the 777 be, as it will continue to sell for atleast a few more years. Then they can focus on a Y3 that would be 10 abreast starting from the 77W up and use the engines and landing gear from the 787-10 to build a 787-9LR. I feel this would complete the 787 and allow Boeing to tackle the 350 at the lowest cost and eventually beat it.
 
User avatar
GrahamHill
Posts: 2958
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2007 6:35 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 3:56 pm



Quoting Caljn (Reply 31):
The 737 feels as if it enjoys it's mission of transporting you and is determined to show you its stuff. The 320, I might as well be sleeping in my bed.

So you prefer the Ferrari to the Bentley?! Big grin
"A learned fool is more foolish than an ignorant one" - Moliere
 
kaitak
Posts: 8969
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:12 pm

Remember that chap, Widebody-something, who used to prepare some excellent comparison charts of the various types; it would be very interesting to see the 77W and A350 "side by side" as it were; what are the dimensions of the A350-1000 and how do they compare to the 77W? (Indeed, for that matter, is the aircraft as long as the A346?)
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 4:35 pm

I think part of the main point the boeing fellah is making here is that he frankly does not believe Airbus will meet their targets for the A350-1000, a doubt I've shared from the beginning.

And part of this thinking comes from Boeing having now real experience with both CFRP fuselage and the GEnx/TrentNG engines and having to revise THEIR 787 projections downward.

At the same time, Boeing has revised the 77W specs UPWARD over time. First during testing, then at certification, then after a year+ in service, and they plan to do so again by a percent or two.

So if Boeing is able to eek out a little more efficiency (1-2%) by 2015 and rejigger the interior to hold 10Y at 17.2" by reshaping the sidewalls, changing insulation and adding noise abatement to the engines, the 77W is going to be a decent performer.

When you look at sales numbers this year, where the 77W is outselling the A350-1000, it comes down to two things: airlines with real need aren't willing to wait until 2015, especially if they already fly 777s; and airlines don't think the 77W will be such a disadvantage 4 years after they get theirs in 2012 when the A350-1000 starts flying en masse in 2016.

Boeing can make the decision in 2011 to either update the 777 or launch Y3, and get the product to market in either 2015 or 2016/17 depending on the decision. Either way, they don't lose much to the A350 by waiting, and 4 years of technological improvements and market progression can be quite valuable when planning a response.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 35):
Remember that chap, Widebody-something

I think he did it if you do a search. It's in a thread somewhere. But good luck finding it with our lovely search engine...  Wink
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:02 pm



Quoting PlunaCRJ (Reply 25):
Not personal opinion, neither facts. It is the perception I have of the aircraft.

Perception = personal opinion. IOW, to you the A320 seems better for whatever reasons. Nothing wrong with that at all.

I think Caljn was taking the piss with his comments. Reminds me of the fun with the little European manuals - nothing says fun more than bouncing down some beat-up narrow road grinding the gears as we go. Except, perhaps, seeing and hearing a local do the same. LOL.
 
JoeCanuck
Posts: 3952
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 3:30 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:09 pm



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 36):
nd rejigger the interior to hold 10Y at 17.2"

Emirates is currently 10y wiith 17.0" seats, at least according to Seatguru.com. 2" more width across 10 seats is all that's needed.
What the...?
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:33 pm



Quoting SeaBosDca (Reply 7):
What would a wider Y3 bring to the table that a 787HGW wouldn't, except for the ability to reach higher passenger capacity at the larger sizes?

I've been wondering that for a year and still haven't seen a satisfactory answer. The 787/A350 cross section seems optimal for a 777-300ER sized airliner (in CFRP, not metal).

Quoting RJ111 (Reply 22):
What will keep the 773ER going is Boeings ability to offer it for less - as they have already covered R&D costs, and can essentially 'milk' the product like airbus have been doing with the A330 recently.

The problem with that theory is that the 787 and A350 will be much less expensive to manufacture than the 777.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 30):
That means Boeing could have a Y3 that was 15% heavier and still use GE90-115Bs for all flight envelopes.

By the time Boeing could bring a Y3 to market, the GE90-115B will be ancient technology. There is no way it could be reused. It might make sense for GE to scale up the GEnx, but even that will probably be too old. Most likely, an all-new engine would be needed.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:51 pm



Quoting Zvezda (Reply 39):
By the time Boeing could bring a Y3 to market, the GE90-115B will be ancient technology. There is no way it could be reused. It might make sense for GE to scale up the GEnx, but even that will probably be too old. Most likely, an all-new engine would be needed.

Yes it will, but what I really meant was Y3 likely doesn't need more then 115,000lbs of thrust, which we know is doable.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 35):
Remember that chap, Widebody-something, who used to prepare some excellent comparison charts of the various types; it would be very interesting to see the 77W and A350 "side by side" as it were; what are the dimensions of the A350-1000 and how do they compare to the 77W? (Indeed, for that matter, is the aircraft as long as the A346?)

I have all of Widebodyphotog's charts (to my knowledge), but he hasn't (to my knowledge) done an A350XWB one. I do have the original A350-800 and A350-900 charts.

At 74m, the A350-1000 is about 1m shorter then the 75m A340-600.
 
sstsomeday
Posts: 821
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:20 pm



Quoting Flipdewaf (Reply 3):
The A350 will no way kill off the 77W but it'll reduce orders to a trickle I believe and boeing shouldn't worry about it. the T7 will be 20 years past EIS and then is probably about the time to start developing a replacement.

I agree. I would venture that as with other areas of technology, commercial airliners are going to evolve/improve at a faster rate than in the golden era. Look how quickly our computers get out of date. This means that clean sheet airliners will be green lit more often and existing airliners become obsolete, or relegated to 3rd world countries, or refitted as freighters, or retired sooner.

I would describe the shorter than anticipated lifespan and success of the 340 as evidence of this development. It's perfectly fine technology was somewhat leapfrogged, in my view, by the 777.

I'm no expert on this, but It seems to me that Boeing may take Airbus's lead to design A/C that are less "stout" and not designed to do as many cycles (I have heard the 737 described here as designed to do almost twice the cycles of a 320), because in this day and age existing technology becomes outdated more quickly.
I come in peace
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:24 pm



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 23):
Boeing probably has 2 to 3 years before they realistically have to make a decision on which way to go with the 777 or its replacement.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 36):
Boeing can make the decision in 2011 to either update the 777 or launch Y3, and get the product to market in either 2015 or 2016/17 depending on the decision. Either way, they don't lose much to the A350 by waiting, and 4 years of technological improvements and market progression can be quite valuable when planning a response.

 checkmark  These two replies pretty much sum it up for me.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 36):
I think part of the main point the boeing fellah is making here is that he frankly does not believe Airbus will meet their targets for the A350-1000, a doubt I've shared from the beginning.

I think Bentrott is just sowing FUD here. In case the 350XWB does not meet its guarantees, customers may earn more money from penalty payments than they would from operating the aircraft. I hear that after the 380 experience contracts are pretty tuff in this trespect.  duck 
 
ikramerica
Posts: 13772
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:33 pm



Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 42):
I think Bentrott is just sowing FUD here.

I don't know. I think Boeing has already learned that all the new technologies they are using in the 787 are not quite offering the weight and performance benefits they were hoping, and have lowered their performance projections accordingly. Further, they are having trouble getting the 787-10 up to snuff without major modifications, but Airbus expects the A350-1000 to basically be a simple stretch (with extra wheels) and fly 8000nm.

Boeing see Airbus using basically the same technology as the 787, with some a little more advanced and some less, and claiming even GREATER performance improvements, especially in the A350-1000. I think Boeing is thinking it's a bit of snake oil. And considering nobody has signed on but EK and QR for the A350-1000, two airlines who placed huge hubris orders, despite 400 overall commitments for the A350XWB program, maybe Boeing isn't the only one who is a little leery of the A350-1000 reality v. marketing hype...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 868
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:35 pm



Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 14):
and a new engine in the 130 klbs range would be quite expensive to develop-- possibly prohibitively so: the larger the airplane, the fewer are sold, and only two per airframe at that!



Quoting 2175301 (Reply 23):
Boeing probably has 2 to 3 years before they realistically have to make a decision on which way to go with the 777 or its replacement.

 checkmark 

I think Boeing would like to have an offering on the table in 3 years, and refine its dialogue with the customers until then. I think Airbus is playing an interesting game here. I don't think they are going to firm up the 3510 for a while yet. I have no idea how they convinced EK and QR to buy what they did unless those "firm" orders have an out. If Airbus firms up early, then Boeing can counter earlier, in say, 3 years with a better proposal. Airbus in that situation would face leadership sales for the A3510 for only 3 years, out of say, 15 for the life of the airframe. It's best move is to wait as long as possible before firming the A3510 to better match Y3 for the long term.

An interesting game of marketing "chicken"
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:42 pm



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 43):
Airbus expects the A350-1000 to basically be a simple stretch (with extra wheels) and fly 8000nm.

The A350 is optimised around a different length than the 787. Look at the wings - they are considerably larger.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 43):
I think Boeing is thinking it's a bit of snake oil. And considering nobody has signed on but EK and QR for the A350-1000, two airlines who placed huge hubris orders, despite 400 overall commitments for the A350XWB program, maybe Boeing isn't the only one who is a little leery of the A350-1000 reality v. marketing hype...

When an airline signs a firm contract they are signing on performance guarentees. This applies to both the 787 and A350.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 13471
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:43 pm



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 43):
And considering nobody has signed on but EK and QR for the A350-1000

Of course the -1000 is also the model that's furthest away from EIS (2015), so I would expect it to garner much slower sales at this time. It's clearly aimed at the 777 replacement market, which doesn't really mature for a few years yet (hence being the last model to be available).
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23206
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:49 pm



Quoting SSTsomeday (Reply 41):
I'm no expert on this, but It seems to me that Boeing may take Airbus's lead to design A/C that are less "stout" and not designed to do as many cycles (I have heard the 737 described here as designed to do almost twice the cycles of a 320), because in this day and age existing technology becomes outdated more quickly.

One of the big advantages of CFRP is that it will handle far more cycles then Al. I expect many 787 operators are looking at keeping their planes for scores of years.

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 42):
I think Bentrott is just sowing FUD here.

As the A350XWB reaches each new milestone, it loses range from the previous. The A350-1000 was supposed to fly 8500nm, and now it is 8000nm. Randy Baseler felt it would eventually fall to around the 7800nm of the 77W.

Mind you, the 787 also lost range as it reached final configuration, so my comment is not meant to disparage the A350, but to show that Bentrott's comments are not completely without merit.
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 7:08 pm



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 43):
Further, they are having trouble getting the 787-10 up to snuff without major modifications, but Airbus expects the A350-1000 to basically be a simple stretch (with extra wheels) and fly 8000nm.

What should make a difference is that the 350-1000 wing is *baseline* for the whole family. Still needs extra wheels, indeed.
 
EI321
Posts: 4788
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: B777-300ER Vs. A350-1000: Boeing's View

Sat Dec 01, 2007 7:31 pm



Quoting Scbriml (Reply 46):
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 43):
And considering nobody has signed on but EK and QR for the A350-1000

Of course the -1000 is also the model that's furthest away from EIS (2015), so I would expect it to garner much slower sales at this time. It's clearly aimed at the 777 replacement market, which doesn't really mature for a few years yet (hence being the last model to be available).

Correct. the A350-1000 is a replacement for the A340-600 and 777-300ER. These are both very young aircraft, so their replacement cycle eill not come up until well into the next decade.