worldrider
Topic Author
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:59 am

By reading recent news its quite obvious Airbus is leaving a promissing market to Boeing, the ~350-410 seat range.
Indeed, the future 777-9/8X seems to be already eating into A350J and A380's lunch, IMO.
Why so? Aren't airlines more inclined to buy a smaller, cheaper, less risky (in terms of passenger capacity in economic crisis context) and more cargo capable 777-9X??? as opposed to the undeniably efficient A380.
Therefore a 78m? streched A350-1100 as mentioned in a previous thread: " on 308 tonnes MTOW should carry 777-9X payload to within 1000Nm of what the 777-9X can .. would be a pretty eye-catching for a plane with a 44t lower MTOW..."

and couldn't it made available a bit earlier than the 777X?
i just cant believe Airbus management are still waiting to see how the market reacts first. recent news are plain clear.
airlines are ordering year 2020+ replacement TODAY.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23201
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:39 am

While it appears the 777-9 is getting traction with customers, I don't believe it has yet presented itself as being a "clear and present danger" to the A350-1000 and A380-800.

Airbus has already pushed the A350-1000 back years just to make the tweaks they have already done. Pushing it to 78-80 meters will likely involve additional changes to the airframe, especially if they pursue higher weights and more powerful engines (and perhaps wider wings) to maintain performance.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 10:53 am

A Fourth size before the first one has even entered sevivice is a bit premature. Let's see how big of a market there is out there as I think the a351 and a380 will hold their own for years to come. A larger wing, different MLG, and yet another engine anatomy would be necessary for the frame to be more than a simple stretch.

tortugamon
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:00 am

Quoting worldrider (Thread starter):
i just cant believe Airbus management are still waiting to see how the market reacts first

They are quite busy with the current three A350 family members, don't expect anything new in the coming years.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
worldrider
Topic Author
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:00 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 1):
Airbus has already pushed the A350-1000 back years just to make the tweaks they have already done. Pushing it to 78-80 meters will likely involve additional changes to the airframe, especially if they pursue higher weights and more powerful engines (and perhaps wider wings) to maintain performance.

sure such a strech would be challenging, but no doubt the 777X is eating A350-1000's pie, for instance if there weren't a 777X on the line, what alternatives would airlines have as 777W/346/747 replacement? The A350-1000, market says yes the 748? nope..
just look at recent rumors from LH, NH, EK, BA and many others alike. it's about time for an A350-1100 and very appealing REPLY. Airbus has nothing to offer within the 350-450 gap as of today.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:04 am

Quoting worldrider (Reply 4):
just look at recent rumors from LH, NH, EK, BA and many others alike.

BA, CX and EK also have -1000s on order which indicates both aircraft can be operated in the same fleet.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
EmiratesEK231
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:11 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:07 am

This has been asked many-a-time before, and answered many-a-time before.

From John Leahy: "A double stretch [of the A350] has never been shown to work in this industry," claimed Airbus chief operating officer for customers John Leahy, speaking in Toulouse on 16 January. "We couldn't do it. And we don't think [Boeing] could do it either."

Now, there's been a few dieheards who have tried to even second guess the words of JL, himself, and state the a -1100 was possible and not out of the realm of possibility, but for now I will go with what JL has said out of his own mouth.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-over-further-a350-stretch-381285/
I AM A NORTHWEST AIRLINES & EMIRATES LOVER! MY FAVORITE FLIGHTS HAVE BEEN ON THE 777, 727, DC-9, A320, AND 737.
 
worldrider
Topic Author
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:16 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 2):
A larger wing, different MLG, and yet another engine anatomy would be necessary for the frame to be more than a simple stretch

ok, yes, yet its a doable, the 350-1100 would be lighter, more composite, than the 777X for a similar size., bringing better economics. will airbus seat on the sidelines and taste a biter 500+ frames loss?
a larger and composite wing, plus new engines.. isnt it the new core attributes of the new 777x compared to the 777W?
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 11:25 am

Quoting EmiratesEK231 (Reply 6):
Now, there's been a few dieheards who have tried to even second guess the words of JL, himself, and state the a -1100 was possible and not out of the realm of possibility, but for now I will go with what JL has said out of his own mouth.

His (Leahy) argument isn't valid because double stretches like the 787-10 and the 777-9 seems to be working pretty well. A salesman will "go with the wind".

Quoting worldrider (Reply 7):
ok, yes, yet its a doable, the 350-1100 would be lighter, more composite, than the 777X for a similar size., bringing better economics. will airbus seat on the sidelines and taste a biter 500+ frames loss?

As said, they're busy with the current A350 models. It's also not as easy as you might think, a bigger wing will probably not fit inside the Beluga.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
kengo
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Apr 08, 2013 11:04 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 12:11 pm

As karelXWB and tortugamon mentioned, the A35K is surely doable but it wouldn't be simple as one like to think. Just look at the 787-10 for comparision. Boeing in trying to keep the stretch as simple as possible with no real gain in MTOW, sacrifice in range is most noticeable but this was the intention from the beginning. However, if Airbus wants the -1100 to compete head to head with the 779 in payload and range, a simple stretch will not work.

Would love to see how much range is sacrificed if Airbus does a simple stretch from the -1000 to -1100 with standard 3-class seating of 400 pax with no gain in MTOW. Maybe ferpe or someone can run the numbers.  
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 1:04 pm

Quoting worldrider (Reply 7):

Airbus hasn't had a relevant airplane in the 300-550 seat market for many years. They are making tremendous progress with the a359 and A351. They are hardly on the sidelines. Can't do it all at once but down the road you could be right. Not sure how many companies would line up to design a new engine just to split the 400 seat market. Let's see what happens after the launch to see how much lunch the 777x is eating.

tortugamon
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 1:32 pm

Quoting worldrider (Thread starter):
[i]["By reading recent news its quite obvious Airbus is leaving a promissing market to Boeing, the ~350-410 seat range. Indeed, the future 777-9/8X seems to be already eating into A350J and A380's lunch, IMO. Why so? Aren't airlines more inclined to buy a smaller, cheaper, less risky (in terms of passenger capacity in economic crisis context) and more cargo capable 777-9X??? as opposed to the undeniably efficient A380."

As I see it, Airbus started reacting to the B787 a bit late. We can't blame them too much for that, for a long time the A330 went on selling well. But when they DID react, they had little option but to aim the A350 at the 'mid-point' between the B787 and the B777.

But now Boeing have announced the 'next generation' B777 - as far as I can tell, two further models, basically a re-designed B772 AND a re-designed B773. And it is also becoming increasingly clear that the larger new ('over 400-seat') B777s look like putting not only the slow-selling B748, but ALSO the A380, more or less out of business.

Given the time it takes to develop new aeroplane designs, what it comes down to, in my opinion, is that, for the foreseeable future, Airbus looks like having to compete with a five-aeroplane range with only three types of its own? No-one's fault, really - until a few months ago, there was every reason to believe that both the B748 and the A380 would 'stay competitive' for some years to come?

[Edited 2013-09-15 06:52:47]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
worldrider
Topic Author
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 3:46 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 11):
But now Boeing have announced the 'next generation' B777 - as far as I can tell, two further models, basically a re-designed B772 AND a re-designed B773. And it is also becoming increasingly clear that the larger new ('over 400-seat') B777s look like putting not only the slow-selling B748, but ALSO the A380, more or less out of business.

No doubt the 777-X is eating B748i and A380 lunch, as stated before airlines are in general more inclined to buy
a smaller and cheaper jet but i doubt it will hurt the A380 the same way it will hurt the 748i..
But i would be very surprised if Airbus observes, passively, the 777X taking over the 400 seat market, the single shot
Needed here is the LIGHTER A350-1100
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 3:56 pm

Quoting worldrider (Reply 12):
But i would be very surprised if Airbus observes

Then why you assume they will?
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
tjh8402
Posts: 530
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:20 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 4:20 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 11):
But now Boeing have announced the 'next generation' B777 - as far as I can tell, two further models, basically a re-designed B772 AND a re-designed B773. And it is also becoming increasingly clear that the larger new ('over 400-seat') B777s look like putting not only the slow-selling B748, but ALSO the A380, more or less out of business.

My understanding is that the 777x is not simply a redesign of the two current versions. the 777-8 is closer in size to a 773 than a 772, and so more of a 773LR or 773-NG. The 779 is a stretch of the current 773, and so therefore is one size bigger. Boeing appears to be pulling the 777 frame out of the -200's market, and letting the 789 and 78J occupy that place in the line up.
 
LH707330
Posts: 1510
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:27 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 4:50 pm

This a-net obsession with not letting other manufacturers eat one another's lunch seems to disregard the development resources needed to field these planes. With the A350 (900 and 1000), Airbus staked out a huge chunk of territory in the 300-350 (nominal) seat market, and will have their hands full developing and optimizing these frames before doing anything else with them. Boeing has effectively ceded the 77E segment to the 350, and has decided to optimize the 779 at a higher size where they know they will have some of their own turf. Neither team has the dev budget to go after every segment, so it's better for them to split the market up in discrete 787-350-779 chunks.

This strategy of competing with slightly different frames is good for both manufacturers, because they don't have to discount as much when the other frame is not as optimal for a given airline's RFP. It ultimately benefits the airlines too, who have more choices to right-size their fleets and regain the slightly higher capex through better opex.

Now, as far as the development of the A350-1100 is concerned, Airbus probably doesn't want to commit anything until they understand exactly how the -1000 version works out, a bit like Boeing's caution with the 7810. Assuming the 779 doesn't show up before 2020 anyway, the smart move for Airbus is to sit tight and make a decision later on when they have more information.
 
worldrider
Topic Author
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 5:07 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 15):
Now, as far as the development of the A350-1100 is concerned, Airbus probably doesn't want to commit anything until they understand exactly how the -1000 version works out, a bit like Boeing's caution with the 7810. Assuming the 779 doesn't show up before 2020 anyway, the smart move for Airbus is to sit tight and make a decision later on when they have more information

I don't think they can afford to wait that longer, their ambition is to retain at least 50% of the WB market share
With the arrival of the 777-9X without a A350-1100 to compete (on time) they will lose it.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 5:23 pm

Quoting worldrider (Reply 16):
With the arrival of the 777-9X without a A350-1100 to compete (on time) they will lose it.

That's another strange assumption, you believe there is no room between Boeing's 323-class 787 seater and the 407-class 779 seater, a gap of 84 seats? The 350-class A350-1000 fits well in between those two.
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
worldrider
Topic Author
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 5:35 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 17):

Lets's say that im full of strange assumptions, i dont say the A350-1000 isnt right sized i just mean they have
Have nothing between within 350-450 seat gap to compete, it was fine till the 777-9X came into the game.
So as of now, nobody here has heard about any serious intention to place a streched 350-1100
 
waly777
Posts: 416
Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 7:11 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 5:35 pm

Quoting worldrider (Reply 16):
I don't think they can afford to wait that longer, their ambition is to retain at least 50% of the WB market share With the arrival of the 777-9X without a A350-1100 to compete (on time) they will lose it.

You do know the aircraft manufacturers have limited financial & man power resources right? They've barely started testing of the 359 and still have a lot of work to do to get the other 2 in the family in the air as well getting them into airline service as smoothly as possible.

Secondly, when has the 779 eaten the a380 and 748's lunch? It is not yet released and no airline has ordered it, so I am not quite sure how you jumped to this conclusion. In addition, a possible 350-1100 is going to dilute sales of the 350-1000 which in itself already requires substantial re-work as a result of it's seemingly minor differences. Now, if the 350-1000 modifications required it got pushed back a few years, how long do you think developing a new wing & landing gear will take? Airbus will react appropriately but I seriously doubt a 350-1100 is going to be the form it takes except this is a simple stretch based on the wing and MTOW of the 1000.
The test of first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold 2 opposed ideas in the mind concurrently, and still function
 
User avatar
TheRedBaron
Posts: 3081
Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 6:17 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 5:52 pm

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 15):
This a-net obsession with not letting other manufacturers eat one another's lunch seems to disregard the development resources needed to field these planes. With the A350 (900 and 1000), Airbus staked out a huge chunk of territory in the 300-350 (nominal) seat market, and will have their hands full developing and optimizing these frames before doing anything else with them. Boeing has effectively ceded the 77E segment to the 350, and has decided to optimize the 779 at a higher size where they know they will have some of their own turf. Neither team has the dev budget to go after every segment, so it's better for them to split the market up in discrete 787-350-779 chunks.

This strategy of competing with slightly different frames is good for both manufacturers, because they don't have to discount as much when the other frame is not as optimal for a given airline's RFP. It ultimately benefits the airlines too, who have more choices to right-size their fleets and regain the slightly higher capex through better opex.

Now, as far as the development of the A350-1100 is concerned, Airbus probably doesn't want to commit anything until they understand exactly how the -1000 version works out, a bit like Boeing's caution with the 7810. Assuming the 779 doesn't show up before 2020 anyway, the smart move for Airbus is to sit tight and make a decision later on when they have more information.

Agree, I think most A meters think ordering desicion is only based on capacity and fuel, also that Airbus and Boeing will launch a new type to cover all the small gaps on the market, quite the contrary if you see the sub 140 pax market where they simply got out...

The latest WB have similar configurations, and their capacities are within -120 Pax, and ranges and MTOW all aver the place, also they have promised stellar maintenance cost (that some carriers are still unsure of), and fuel consumption, so choosing a new airplane is based on a very complex set of needs and parameters, neither A or B can make an aircraft good for everybody, they will make their best guesses an offer the product hoping that it will cover most of all their customer needs.

Airbus will wait for the 777X launch and see the final specs, and the reaction, and then make desicions based on that, heck we may even see Aibus going down with a lighter, sort range A330 and aet Boeing lunch on the lower end of the market...

TRB
The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
 
spink
Posts: 316
Joined: Tue Aug 09, 2005 5:58 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:18 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 8):
His (Leahy) argument isn't valid because double stretches like the 787-10 and the 777-9 seems to be working pretty well. A salesman will "go with the wind".

The 777-9 isn't a double stretch, it is an NG. 78J could be called a double stretch but a lot of the frame was designed for the 789 in the beginning.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Crew
Posts: 20153
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Sun Sep 15, 2013 9:30 pm

The 777-300 fuselage was a stretch, and the 777-9 fuselage will be another (small) stretch. The airframe itself will of course get a new wing and engines too.

[Edited 2013-09-15 14:35:58]
Close, but no cigar http://vine.co/v/OjqeYWWpVWK
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:20 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 22):
The 777-300 fuselage was a stretch, and the 777-9 fuselage will be another (small) stretch. The airframe itself will of course get a new wing and engines too.

By that logic, wouldn't the A333 be a double stretch of the A300?

tortugamon
 
PlanesNTrains
Posts: 5488
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 4:19 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:29 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 11):
And it is also becoming increasingly clear that the larger new ('over 400-seat') B777s look like putting not only the slow-selling B748, but ALSO the A380, more or less out of business.

I personally think that's a bit premature of a statement to make. We only have rumors of potential 779X orders - how that is extrapolated into putting the A380 out of business is beyond me.

-Dave
-Dave
 
StickShaker
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:34 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:37 am

Quoting Kengo (Reply 9):
Would love to see how much range is sacrificed if Airbus does a simple stretch from the -1000 to -1100 with standard 3-class seating of 400 pax with no gain in MTOW. Maybe ferpe or someone can run the numbers.

If Airbus do anything at all I suspect it will be a lightened 35J to compete with the 787-10. This is the aircraft that is really going to give Airbus some grief in terms of lost sales. A light 35J would use much the same formula as the 787-10 keeping R&D costs to a minimum along with time to market.


Regards,
StickShaker
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 2:49 am

Quoting tjh8402 (Reply 14):
My understanding is that the 777x is not simply a redesign of the two current versions.

Agreed, tjh8402 - trouble is, though, it's hard to find the right word for what Boeing are planning to do. It appears to be basically a stretch of both existing types, plus use of new materials; specifically, aluminium/lithium (lighter for the same strength) for the fuselages, and lighter composite wings.

Not much doubt about the strategic objectives, though; 'hopefully,' one type to out-perform the A350-1000, and a larger one to 'out-sell' the jumbos by carrying almost as many passengers at substantially-lower costs per head.

[Edited 2013-09-15 19:55:02]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:46 am

This is the present cabin dimensions of the 350-400 frames in question.

..........Lenght m......Whith m.......Fuse. m
35J.......59.................5.6...............72
346.......62.................5.3...............75
77W......59................5.9...............73
779.......62.................6.0...............76

The problem for Airbus is that the 777 cross section is 0.4m wider an therefore more suitable for 75m birds, it is struturally more efficient and seats 10 abreast in Y. A 350-1100 would have to add a stretch of 6m to enable an additional 6 rows of Y to come in the 404 seats range. It means we would be looking at bird 78m long, 3 meters longer then the A346 and 2 meters longer then the 779! It would weight less (probable OEW around 160-165t versus 175t for the 779) but would need changes to MLG (articulating as the 777), the wing (the 779 has a 71m span versus 65m for the 35J) and engines (the 779 has 103klbf engines with PR 60 vs 97klbf with PR 53).

So even if the 35K (  ) would have a lower OEW it needs a LOT of changes to be competitive with the 779 (the wing and engines need to be as good). It is a major project, one that A would like to do after the 35J is flying and a good way through certification.
Non French in France
 
Max Q
Posts: 5644
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:46 am

Problem with the A350 is, it's not wide enough, it will have to be stretched excessively to compete with the new triple 7's on capacity and that will cost too much on the weight side.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
Pacific
Posts: 1043
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2000 2:46 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 5:03 am

So the "refreshed" 777X is going to have new wings, engines and an Al-Li fuse, and is guaranteed to ruin the business case for a new-build composite aeroplane.

I seem to recall hearing something similar back in 2005.
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:11 am

Quoting Pacific (Reply 29):
So the "refreshed" 777X is going to have new wings, engines and an Al-Li fuse, and is guaranteed to ruin the business case for a new-build composite aeroplane.

I seem to recall hearing something similar back in 2005.

The key difference between these cases (787 vs A350 mk1) and 35J vs 779 is in the engine freeze dates. The A350 mk1 should have used the same engines as the 787, thus the fuselage inferiority would not have been masked by better engines. This is the case in the 779, the GE9X has a 4-5 year later design date then the TXWB and the fuel consumption per pound of force is therefore also 4-5% better (you gain about 1% per year according to RR and GE). This masks the higher weight of the 777X for the same task.
Non French in France
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1714
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:14 am

Quoting Kengo (Reply 9):
Just look at the 787-10 for comparision

The 787-10 is MTOW limited because Boeing chose to stick with a 4 wheel main gear, Airbus is moving to a 6 wheel gear for the -1000 so should not be limited in the same way for the -1100

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 23):
By that logic, wouldn't the A333 be a double stretch of the A300?

By that logic the 777-9 is a triple streach of the 777-200 ---> 777-8 ---> 777-300/ER ---> 777-9..

Quoting ferpe (Reply 28):
but would need changes to MLG (articulating as the 777)

That depends on where the frame was stretched, in front of or behind the wing.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 28):
A 350-1100 would have to add a stretch of 6m to enable an additional 6 rows of Y to come in the 404 seats range

4 or 5 rows should be sufficient, 380-390 seats would be the sweet spot I would think, plus a 4m extension would be less problematic from an engineering standpoint.

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 15):
This a-net obsession with not letting other manufacturers eat one another's lunch seems to disregard the development resources needed to field these planes.

Yup you can live with a lot of shared lunches if owning the lunch cart is going to cost you several billion dollars.
BV
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:47 am

I made a quick check of what a -1100 could possibly look like. Here the data:

Fuselage:
I added 9 frames, 5 before the wing and 4 aft (like the 787-10) which makes for a 78m fuselage (frame spacing is 0.635m). This takes the wettted area from 1220m2 to 1330m2.

Wing:
I added Y type wingtips like the MAX to gain start performance and cruise drag, it takes the effective wing span from 65.7m to 67.0m. The 779 effective wingspan is 70m but it is heavier.

Engines:
I took a tuned TXWB 97klbf core and refanned it with a CRRP fan to a 10+ BPR. This increases PR, BPR and thus fuel efficiency to the ballpark of the GE9X. TO Thrust around 100klbf.


These changes brings the OEW from some 150t to about 160-165t, it put in 163t. It all now requires a MTOW of 320t to make the bird fly 8100nm ESAD which is rumored to be the spec range of the 779. That weight gives a wingloading of 690kg/m2 which is a little below the 779 and should be OK. The MLG would need some tuning to take the higher weight and help with the tail clearance.

And now to the magical numbers, the fuel consumed per pax and 1000nm would be 33kg vs 36kg for the 779, trip fuel for the 8100nm spec trip would be 108t vs 121t. I will have to check that I did not miss anything, it was a first cut but it seems plausible, the 779 would have a 12t higher OEW and 30t higher MTOW to gain the same payload-range figure.

[Edited 2013-09-15 23:54:51]
Non French in France
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1714
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 6:58 am

Quoting ferpe (Reply 32):
Engines:
I took a tuned TXWB 97klbf core and refanned it with a CRRP fan to a 10+ BPR. This increases PR, BPR and thus fuel efficiency to the ballpark of the GE9X. TO Thrust around 100klbf.

You should remove 1t per engine if you are changing fan to CRRP.
BV
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 8:16 am

Quoting LH707330 (Reply 15):

This a-net obsession with not letting other manufacturers eat one another's lunch seems to disregard the development resources needed to field these planes.

Here's the key issue.

Any business has a backlog. if you're a bakery, its cupcake flavors. If you're a software company, its features. If you're a planemaker, its airplanes and their improvements.

These things MUST be prioritized, and you CANNOT do it all at once. You must prioritize these things and do them as makes sense.

The airline industry continues to demand more airplanes. Delta is ordering A321s and 737-900ERs. Others are ordering A350s + 777s of all types.

There's plenty of pie.

NS
 
EmiratesEK231
Posts: 77
Joined: Sun Jul 21, 2013 10:11 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 8:44 am

Quoting ferpe (Reply 32):
I added Y type wingtips like the MAX to gain start performance and cruise drag, it takes the effective wing span from 65.7m to 67.0m.

Would that even be feasible, since I'd imagine Boeing definitely has a patent on that design???
I AM A NORTHWEST AIRLINES & EMIRATES LOVER! MY FAVORITE FLIGHTS HAVE BEEN ON THE 777, 727, DC-9, A320, AND 737.
 
parapente
Posts: 1286
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:17 am

Re Reply 22
The 777-300 fuselage was a stretch, and the 777-9 fuselage will be another (small) stretch. The airframe itself will of course get a new wing and engines too.

IE The 777-9 is NOT a double stretch as it is getting a totally new (larger) wing.

The 787-10 however is. The issue here is just how compromised will be the range of the aircraft?

It's abit like the A322 argument. Suddenly the wing loading goes off the chart,flight ceilings are compromised (as are landing and T/O speeds), also flying in thicker (lower) air effects fuel consumption and so it goes on. I am surprised that the smallest version of the 787 wing can indeed carry the loads associated with the -10 efficiently. Boeing think so so I guess they are right.

The same would be true of a 1100. Range would suffer heavily. If thats not a problem - and there is a demand for the aircraft then yes - perhaps - one day. But as stated they have more than enough to get on wth at the moment!
 
worldrider
Topic Author
Posts: 215
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 11:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:41 am

Quoting ferpe (Reply 32):
And now to the magical numbers, the fuel consumed per pax and 1000nm would be 33kg vs 36kg for the 779, trip fuel for the 8100nm spec trip would be 108t vs 121t. I will have to check that I did not miss anything, it was a first cut but it seems plausible, the 779 would have a 12t higher OEW and 30t higher MTOW to gain the same payload-range figure.
Quoting gigneil (Reply 34):
The airline industry continues to demand more airplanes. Delta is ordering A321s and 737-900ERs. Others are ordering A350s + 777s of all types.

There's plenty of pie.

Yes. plenty of pie available for a lighter A350-1100, IF airbus goes for it, lighter than a 777-9x with more or less the same capacity. Airbus messed up with the 340-550/600, ridiculed!, i repeat they have nothing to offer at 400 seat capacity, and they didnt need it until the 777-9x arrived, as you all know, will they allow the later cannibalize the 350-1000 and the A380 big time! they saw the 777X landing long ago, did the baby ever learn chess game? we're talking about a trillion, yes, trillion dollar market, the wide body jet market.
they cant afford to wait until the 350-1000 is flying to offer a longer jet, by then 90% of the 350-450 seat jets would already be ordered, long gone, to Boeing
 
ferpe
Posts: 2651
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 9:54 am

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 33):

You should remove 1t per engine if you are changing fan to CRRP.

As I raise the BPR the fan and fan case is larger, I have estimated that what I gain on the engines with CFRP I loose in the lager engine dimensions and nacelle and somewhat beefier pylon. I have the engines as a wash.

Quoting EmiratesEK231 (Reply 35):
Would that even be feasible, since I'd imagine Boeing definitely has a patent on that design???

Don't think so, Whitcombs original winglet was a double feather and on that followed Zig double feather designs including the MD-11 and latest from Aviation partner. It should be no IP problem, more a ground clearance one. Key is A needs more aspect ratio to fight with the 779 without going to folding wingtip, this is mined with B patents on the contrary IIRC  .
Non French in France
 
Aither
Posts: 995
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 10:45 am

Quoting worldrider (Thread starter):
By reading recent news its quite obvious Airbus is leaving a promissing market to Boeing, the ~350-410 seat range.

I'm not sure it's so obvious. From many hubs there is clear gap between routes to the big "world cities" (LHR, LAX, etc.) and the other markets that are much much smaller.
Never trust the obvious
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:07 am

Quoting worldrider (Reply 37):

A350-1000 should be flying in 2016. You think that 90% of the 400 seat market will be gone by then? The 757-300 and the 767-400 might have sold similarly but they were not successful frames. All successful aircraft are sold over 15+ years.

The A350 already has ~700 orders and zero are in service and probably won't be for a year. Their goal is about 10/month by around 2017 which means slots are full into the 2020s and no one can be sure that the supply chain will fully ramp up so quickly. There is a lot of work to be done with what they have at the moment.

I really don't see this as that big of a market that Airbus needs a response.

tortugamon
 
a380787
Posts: 4414
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:38 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 11:29 am

Quoting Max Q (Reply 27):

Problem with the A350 is, it's not wide enough, it will have to be stretched excessively to compete with the new triple 7's on capacity and that will cost too much on the weight side.

wouldn't they be able to make it up in total revenue by touting the higher cargo-to-bags ratio ?

The bigger issue seems not to be Airbus failing to make a A35K, but Airbus not optimizing the A358.
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1714
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 1:17 pm

Quoting ferpe (Reply 38):
As I raise the BPR the fan and fan case is larger, I have estimated that what I gain on the engines with CFRP I loose in the lager engine dimensions and nacelle and somewhat beefier pylon. I have the engines as a wash.

Why bother re-engineering the TXWB to raise BPR? RR can most probably add 3k thrust without any major work plus year on year improvements will get it to GE90x levels in the next 8 years which is when the 777x will EIS. Just re-fan it with CRRP, save 2 tonnes in OEW and add efficiency through weight loss, simple.
BV
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6674
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 3:45 pm

Quoting a380787 (Reply 41):
The bigger issue seems not to be Airbus failing to make a A35K, but Airbus not optimizing the A358.

Agreed. The latter should be the priority in my opinion and it is low hanging fruit.

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 42):
RR can most probably add 3k thrust without any major work

It should take more than 3k to do the job.

tortugamon
 
BoeingVista
Posts: 1714
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:06 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 43):
It should take more than 3k to do the job.

I don't think so but it depends on the length of the stretch and what they decide to make MTOW, but for reference the 4k boost from 93-97klbs allowed a 10t MTOW growth and 400nm range increase so 3k will be plenty for even a 5m stretch.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 43):
Agreed. The latter should be the priority in my opinion and it is low hanging fruit.

The A358 is not going change, if it does it gets pushed beyond 2018 because of the -1000 development. The low hanging fruit is a A330NEO.
BV
 
AustrianZRH
Posts: 852
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 5:55 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:22 pm

Quoting worldrider (Reply 37):
Airbus messed up with the 340-550/600, ridiculed!

We might even be in the same situation as we were before - just the other way round. Airbus designed the A345/A346 with 742/743 replacement in mind, and compete with the 744 on the lower end. The only pity was that Boeing had the more modern 777 at hand to further develop into the 777-300ER - and the rest is history, as they say. The 346 was never the dog it was made to here on a.net - until the 788 came online it was probably the 2nd-most efficient plane flying!

So now Boeing is tweaking the 777 into another generation - history might repeat itself if Airbus engineers manage to do to the A350 what Boeing did to the 777. Boeing will have an extremely efficient 777 derivative on offer - but maybe the European guys will simply manage to have something more efficient!

And yes, I am an Airbus fanboy, so please bear with me  .
WARNING! The post above should be taken with a grain of salt! Furthermore, it may be slightly biased towards A.
 
a380787
Posts: 4414
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:38 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:36 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 44):

The A358 is not going change, if it does it gets pushed beyond 2018 because of the -1000 development. The low hanging fruit is a A330NEO.

Agreed. A 332neo or 333neo with low-enough up-front sticker price would give 787-8 a run for its money on short-haul or mid-haul routes.
 
airbazar
Posts: 6936
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:12 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:54 pm

Quoting Kengo (Reply 9):
However, if Airbus wants the -1100 to compete head to head with the 779 in payload and range, a simple stretch will not work.
Quoting ferpe (Reply 28):
So even if the 35K ( ) would have a lower OEW it needs a LOT of changes to be competitive with the 779 (the wing and engines need to be as good).

Why is everyone implying that a -1100 would be competing with the 779? Airbus already has the A3510 for that. The 779 was launched as the direct competitor to the A3510. As I see it, the -1100 would be a regional VLA. Its range would be secondary only to its ability to carry more payload a shorter distance.
What would the range be for an hypothetical simple streatch of the A3510?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 23201
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 4:57 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 44):
The low hanging fruit is a A330NEO.

Not going to happen.   



Quoting a380787 (Reply 46):
Agreed. A 332neo or 333neo with low-enough up-front sticker price would give 787-8 a run for its money on short-haul or mid-haul routes.

It would be a less-effective competitor than the A350-800 and that model isn't doing so hot against the 787-8 at the moment.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3797
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

Timeline For The A350-1100?

Mon Sep 16, 2013 5:02 pm

Quoting Kengo (Reply 9):
As karelXWB and tortugamon mentioned, the A35K is surely doable but it wouldn't be simple as one like to think.

It will be a nice design challenge for the Airbus research and development teams after the A350's are in full production and after the B77X-program is also in production. With the order book as full as it is they have plenty of time to react.

Quoting ferpe (Reply 28):
So even if the 35K (  ) would have a lower OEW it needs a LOT of changes to be competitive with the 779 (the wing and engines need to be as good). It is a major project, one that A would like to do after the 35J is flying and a good way through certification.

Exactly.   .

Quoting ferpe (Reply 32):
I made a quick check of what a -1100 could possibly look like. Here the data:

Fuselage:
I added 9 frames, 5 before the wing and 4 aft (like the 787-10) which makes for a 78m fuselage (frame spacing is 0.635m). This takes the wettted area from 1220m2 to 1330m2.

Wing:
I added Y type wingtips like the MAX to gain start performance and cruise drag, it takes the effective wing span from 65.7m to 67.0m. The 779 effective wingspan is 70m but it is heavier.

Engines:
I took a tuned TXWB 97klbf core and refanned it with a CRRP fan to a 10+ BPR. This increases PR, BPR and thus fuel efficiency to the ballpark of the GE9X. TO Thrust around 100klbf.


These changes brings the OEW from some 150t to about 160-165t, it put in 163t. It all now requires a MTOW of 320t to make the bird fly 8100nm ESAD which is rumored to be the spec range of the 779. That weight gives a wingloading of 690kg/m2 which is a little below the 779 and should be OK. The MLG would need some tuning to take the higher weight and help with the tail clearance.

And now to the magical numbers, the fuel consumed per pax and 1000nm would be 33kg vs 36kg for the 779, trip fuel for the 8100nm spec trip would be 108t vs 121t. I will have to check that I did not miss anything, it was a first cut but it seems plausible, the 779 would have a 12t higher OEW and 30t higher MTOW to gain the same payload-range figure.

Great analysis. Thanks for that. After 2020, there is plenty of room to go after an A35K or A350-1100.  .