tortugamon
Topic Author
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:21 pm

Jon Ostrower is breaking this news:

"Boeing and Airbus are holding a paper airplane contest. A very expensive one. And the winner may get the chance to build the world's longest jet.

The U.S. and European aerospace giants are vying for a coveted spot in the fleet of Singapore Airlines.

By the end of the year, the airline is expected to back one of the company's designs, according to three people familiar with the campaign."
.........
"Airbus' A350-2000 would be nearly 258 feet long and seat 400 passengers. Boeing's 777-10X would be 263 feet and hold 450, in standard arrangements. That's about 30 and 50 passengers more, respectively, than the current largest A350 and 777X jets."
....
"Additionally, both designs would stretch the fuselages to make room in the cabin for more seats, and move galleys used for food preparation to under the passenger cabin floor."
....
The link: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/07/news/co ... index.html

---It is great to see a true plane geek at CNN. Wishing JO the best if he is reading.


tortugamon
 
User avatar
NYCRuss
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:32 pm

I'd love to see how A and B's proposed airplanes compare against SQ's requirements.
 
User avatar
MrHMSH
Posts: 2433
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:50 pm

I wonder what the route profile would be? The A35K and 779 have the range to do Europe at least (and maybe squeeze in N. America), would the A350-2000 and 777-10 be able to make flights to Europe with acceptable loads? Or would it just be a people mover for Asia?
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 17338
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Mon Nov 07, 2016 11:54 pm

Oh... To know the details. This isn't just A vs. B. This is GE and RR going into uncharted territory!

Wow... I so want to know what was bid!

Lightsaber
You know nothing John Snow.
 
downdata
Posts: 537
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:38 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:00 am

Here i thought SQ is over and done with VLAs. <$500 return from Europe to Australia is not helping with their profitability...
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9248
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:06 am

MrHMSH wrote:
I wonder what the route profile would be? The A35K and 779 have the range to do Europe at least (and maybe squeeze in N. America), would the A350-2000 and 777-10 be able to make flights to Europe with acceptable loads? Or would it just be a people mover for Asia?


The 777-10X would only be a 3.5 meter stretch, so we're probably talking an OEW of 435,000 lbs. Assuming no MTOW increase and just trading payload for range, I'd assume that would put the notional range in the 6,500-7,000 nm neighborhood. That can take you plenty of places from SIN.
I have a three post per topic limit. You're welcome to have the last word.
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2549
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:07 am

I hope Boeing can get this one, kinda odd that the 777-9 isn't in consideration. Because after moving everything into the belly I thought it would be able to get around 400 in there.
 
VC10er
Posts: 3940
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 6:25 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:48 am

Enter the 747-8i!

Just kidding! Wow, would Boeing (or Airbus) make 1 more stretch to the the stretch-i-est jets they already are planning just for Singapore? Or, would other airlines potentially take these too?
To Most the Sky is The Limit, For me, the Sky is Home.
 
User avatar
rotating14
Posts: 1390
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:54 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:04 am

ikolkyo wrote:
I hope Boeing can get this one, kinda odd that the 777-9 isn't in consideration. Because after moving everything into the belly I thought it would be able to get around 400 in there.



It was rumored that SQ was looking to place an order for up to 40 a couple of years ago. I'm going to say that the 779 wasn't in the running because for another 50 seats of revenue, its costs you 4 meters of space. As the article alludes to, if Boeing can get the endorsement from an airline like SQ, it puts them in the "red-zone" of the A380 (football reference)


I'm curious about what type of power-plants would be needed to catapult these two aircraft.
 
User avatar
IslandRob
Posts: 616
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2011 2:04 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:10 am

VC10er wrote:
Wow, would Boeing (or Airbus) make 1 more stretch to the the stretch-i-est jets they already are planning just for Singapore? Or, would other airlines potentially take these too?

Maybe Boeing and/or Airbus are angling to get the A380 replacement business. -ir
If you wrote me off, I'd understand it
'Cause I've been on some other planet
So come pick me up, I've landed
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20407
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:19 am

tortugamon wrote:
....
The link: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/07/news/co ... index.html

---It is great to see a true plane geek at CNN. Wishing JO the best if he is reading.

tortugamon


Great to see his content without the WSJ paywall. It's also great to see your post, I haven't seen much from you recently.

And whether or not Jon intended to do so, he's trolling certain a.net members with:

It might be harder for Airbus to provide enough thrust from its Rolls-Royce engines to accommodate the longer and heavier jet, said Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis for the Teal Group consultancy. Airbus and Rolls have already revised the A350's engine once, and the Boeing 777X may already hold an inherent design advantage with the new General Electric engines and larger wingspan, he said.

Image Image Image

downdata wrote:
Here i thought SQ is over and done with VLAs. <$500 return from Europe to Australia is not helping with their profitability...


Indeed, it is a sign they'd rather have bigger twins rather than the well known large quad when they make their next purchasing decision.

To me it seems nostalgic if not anachronistic to read that the rest of the airline industry still regards SQ's decision making with such reverence.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 20407
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:23 am

Revelation wrote:
tortugamon wrote:
....
The link: http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/07/news/co ... index.html

---It is great to see a true plane geek at CNN. Wishing JO the best if he is reading.

tortugamon


Great to see his content without the WSJ paywall. It's also great to see your post, I haven't seen much from you recently.

And whether or not Jon intended to do so, he's trolling certain a.net members with:

It might be harder for Airbus to provide enough thrust from its Rolls-Royce engines to accommodate the longer and heavier jet, said Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis for the Teal Group consultancy. Airbus and Rolls have already revised the A350's engine once, and the Boeing 777X may already hold an inherent design advantage with the new General Electric engines and larger wingspan, he said.

Image Image Image

downdata wrote:
Here i thought SQ is over and done with VLAs. <$500 return from Europe to Australia is not helping with their profitability...


Indeed, it is a sign they'd rather have bigger twins rather than the well known large quad when they make their next purchasing decision.

To me it seems nostalgic if not anachronistic to read that the rest of the airline industry still regards SQ's decision making with such reverence.


rotating14 wrote:
It was rumored that SQ was looking to place an order for up to 40 a couple of years ago. I'm going to say that the 779 wasn't in the running because for another 50 seats of revenue, its costs you 4 meters of space. As the article alludes to, if Boeing can get the endorsement from an airline like SQ, it puts them in the "red-zone" of the A380 (football reference)

I'm curious about what type of power-plants would be needed to catapult these two aircraft.


Given the context, I would have gone with "the 6 yard box". Strangely enough, "world" football hasn't gone metric yet.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12792
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:25 am

SQ hasn't even formally ordered the A350-1000, although they have convertable options.
Probably to keep the door open for Boeing / the 777X.

A 777-9 stretch would be limited to 3 extra meters / 3 rows/ 30 seats though.
Claiming 50 extra seats is the usual marketing magic. Underfloor galleys c/would get under the floor on a 777-9 too.
The demise of the 747-8i makes a 777-10 a no brainer. The 777X structure / wing is already dimensioned for the MTOW growth.

Image

An A350-"2000" could be theoretically stretched 6 meters / 6 rows / 54 seats.
After that it reaches the IATA 8o-x80m envelope restriction (+ extra if underfloor galley).
I don't know what would be involved really in getting to e.g. 83m. All airport were adjusted for A380s too.

Would a 75 meters, shorter 777-9 have been better in combination second version closer to 80 meter, instead of the 777-8?
Sales numbers seem to suggest so.

At some point Boeing will have to build a bigger winged 787-10 anyway, if they want to seriously compete with the A350-900/-1000 anyway.
The 787-10 / 777-8 combi apparently doesnt cut it in that big & importent long haul twin "sweatspot". Where the 777-300ER used to dominate.

Issue in the background is the 777X isn't a little heavier then the XWB's, but 30t.
Better distribute the empty weight over as much seatspace as possible to reach competitive CASM.

Image

It would be interesting if some one gets out of the 80x80m enveloppe, e.g 83 meters.
In that case a bigger A380 could seat over 500, maindeck, 11 abreast.
Last edited by keesje on Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
vheca
Posts: 167
Joined: Wed May 30, 2007 9:20 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:29 am

How would these new aircraft dimensions go in regards to the overall airport restrictions? Not familiar with too many of each of the aircraft's dimensions but curious to note if they are under or over A380 dimensions and the requirement of airports having to expand their taxiway/runway dimensions again to accommodate. Curious.

Disregard, didnt see all of Kessje's post! Sorry!
PAX on-312,320,722,732,733,73H,73W,739,742,743,74C,752,753,762,789,AB4,CR7,D1C,D28,DHT,F27,L11
 
User avatar
NYCRuss
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:58 am

keesje wrote:
SQ hasn't even formally ordered the A350-1000, although they have convertable options.
Probably to keep the door open for Boeing / the 777X.

A 777-9 stretch would be limited to 3 extra meters / 3 rows/ 30 seats though.
Claiming 50 extra seats is the usual marketing magic. Underfloor galleys c/would get under the floor on a 777-9 too.
The demise of the 747-8i makes a 777-10 a no brainer. The 777X structure / wing is already dimensioned for the MTOW growth.

Image

An A350-"2000" could be theoretically stretched 6 meters / 6 rows / 54 seats.
After that it reaches the IATA 8o-x80m envelope restriction (+ extra if underfloor galley).
I don't know what would be involved really in getting to e.g. 83m. All airport were adjusted for A380s too.

Would a 75 meters, shorter 777-9 have been better in combination second version closer to 80 meter, instead of the 777-8?
Sales numbers seem to suggest so.

At some point Boeing will have to build a bigger winged 787-10 anyway, if they want to seriously compete with the A350-900/-1000 anyway.
The 787-10 / 777-8 combi apparently doesnt cut it in that big & importent long haul twin "sweatspot". Where the 777-300ER used to dominate.

Issue in the background is the 777X isn't a little heavier then the XWB's, but 30t.
Better distribute the empty weight over as much seatspace as possible to reach competitive CASM.

Image

It would be interesting if some one gets out of the 80x80m enveloppe, e.g 83 meters.
In that case a bigger A380 could seat over 500, maindeck, 11 abreast.


Your numbers are wrong. The article says that a 777-10 will be 263 feet long. That's probably off because it would be 80.162 meters long. If it's 80 meters long, then it's 3.3 meters extra length. That's easily enough for four more rows of seats with 32" pitch and 18" width. Boeing seems to be claiming one more row by putting galleries under the cabin floor. That hardly seems like an exaggeration.
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:24 am

How much of the galleys can really be put below the main deck? I understand putting lavs underneath (I love the setup in LH's 346s), but it seems like it wouldn't be very efficient to put ovens and whatnot down a staircase as long as you're still serving a giant Y cabin with carts. Or maybe they can come up with some sort of dumb waiter/elevator scheme? That would be interesting.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
AngMoh
Posts: 965
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:25 am

I am still wondering about this. Two years ago it was "confirmed" that SQ would sign an order for 20 777-9s at Farnborough and that never came. I was never convinced this order was in the pipeline and I am skeptical about this new contest too because of the number of aircraft SQ has on order. The have around a 100 outstanding orders and a fleet of around 105, and they are not growing. So where are they going to fly all these aircraft?

But if they go for this new option another factor is playing off A against B. SQ has never been an all A or an all B airline and like to play off both against each other.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739 739ER 742 743 744 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
User avatar
NYCRuss
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:30 am

intotheair wrote:
How much of the galleys can really be put below the main deck? I understand putting lavs underneath (I love the setup in LH's 346s), but it seems like it wouldn't be very efficient to put ovens and whatnot down a staircase as long as you're still serving a giant Y cabin with carts. Or maybe they can come up with some sort of dumb waiter/elevator scheme? That would be interesting.

What was LH's 346 lav setup like?
 
trex8
Posts: 5291
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:31 am

intotheair wrote:
How much of the galleys can really be put below the main deck? I understand putting lavs underneath (I love the setup in LH's 346s), but it seems like it wouldn't be very efficient to put ovens and whatnot down a staircase as long as you're still serving a giant Y cabin with carts. Or maybe they can come up with some sort of dumb waiter/elevator scheme? That would be interesting.

DC10s and L1011s had "elevators" for carts.
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 444
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:45 am

NYCRuss wrote:
What was LH's 346 lav setup like?


Economy class toilets is located on the lower deck, accessible by a staircase near door 3. Mid-cabin galleys is also on the lower deck, with lifts for getting the trolleys up and down.
Last edited by reidar76 on Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:53 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12085
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:52 am

keesje wrote:
The 777X structure / wing is already dimensioned for the MTOW growth.

The wing might be, but what about the gear?
...the 77W is already hell on many runways, and now the same setup has to handle 8 more tonnes??


intotheair wrote:
Or maybe they can come up with some sort of dumb waiter/elevator scheme? That would be interesting.

Wouldn't be anything new though, as that's been an offered option on aircraft for 40yrs+
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1734
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:54 am

SQ had better improve their mainline performance, or even existing orders are at risk of being delayed.
In contrast Scoot and Tiger are going well.
Ruscoe
 
User avatar
intotheair
Posts: 1681
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2014 12:49 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 3:17 am

I guess I learned something! Thanks for the responses. I guess I just never realized there were cart elevators on 747s and A380s, among others.

Either way, I'm a fan of below deck lavs. On the LH A346s, they feel bigger than typical lavs, and it always felt like there was almost never a line for them.
300 319 320 321 332 333 345 346 717 733 734 735 73G 738 739 744 752 753 762 763 772 77W 788 789 CR2 CR7 CR9 Q400 E175 DC10 MD82 MD90
AA AF AS AY AZ B6 BA BR DL F9 FI GA HA KF LH MI QX SK SN SQ UA US VY WN
 
User avatar
RL777
Posts: 647
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 1:43 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 3:22 am

I'll believe it when I see it. That being said, if it indeed does have equal or slightly better range than the current 77W with more payload I could see it being very popular (777-10X)
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 906
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 3:31 am

RL777 wrote:
I'll believe it when I see it. That being said, if it indeed does have equal or slightly better range than the current 77W with more payload I could see it being very popular (777-10X)

Yes, same with me - the only reason why SQ will need an aircraft of this size is when they have decided to replace their A380s with them. Their current orders for the A350-900/B787-10 will largely replace their widebody fleet (except for the A380). With SQ not growing much, why would they want a bigger aircraft than those already on order? Perhaps they are thinking of ordering them for Scoot - the A350-2000/B777-10 would make a nice flagship for the budget airline.
 
User avatar
VirginFlyer
Posts: 5169
Joined: Sun Sep 10, 2000 12:27 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 3:35 am

NYCRuss wrote:
intotheair wrote:
How much of the galleys can really be put below the main deck? I understand putting lavs underneath (I love the setup in LH's 346s), but it seems like it wouldn't be very efficient to put ovens and whatnot down a staircase as long as you're still serving a giant Y cabin with carts. Or maybe they can come up with some sort of dumb waiter/elevator scheme? That would be interesting.

What was LH's 346 lav setup like?

Here are some photos:



As other commenters have noted, it is relatively spacious. When I flew on one (MUC-BOS), they made an announcement at the beginning of the flight for people not to congregate in the lower deck lavatory area.

V/F
It is not for him to pride himself who loveth his own country, but rather for him who loveth the whole world. The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens. —Bahá'u'lláh
 
User avatar
NYCRuss
Posts: 195
Joined: Thu Jul 21, 2016 9:54 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 3:51 am

VirginFlyer wrote:
NYCRuss wrote:
intotheair wrote:
How much of the galleys can really be put below the main deck? I understand putting lavs underneath (I love the setup in LH's 346s), but it seems like it wouldn't be very efficient to put ovens and whatnot down a staircase as long as you're still serving a giant Y cabin with carts. Or maybe they can come up with some sort of dumb waiter/elevator scheme? That would be interesting.

What was LH's 346 lav setup like?

Here are some photos:



As other commenters have noted, it is relatively spacious. When I flew on one (MUC-BOS), they made an announcement at the beginning of the flight for people not to congregate in the lower deck lavatory area.

V/F

Thanks!
 
User avatar
TWA772LR
Posts: 6655
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2011 6:12 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 4:04 am

777-10X??? Oh dear God that thing would be a beast! Is this kind of the same situation Boeing had with the 737MAX where it was discussed under wraps and then released to the public at the right time?
When wasn't America great?


The thoughts and opinions shared under this username are mine and are not influenced by my employer.
 
pasu129
Posts: 504
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 12:39 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 5:15 am

Ever thought of 747-8i but a Mini version? Enter 747-SP (now with 2 engines ONLY)!
Viva Las Vegas
 
tommy1808
Posts: 10259
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:24 am

flee wrote:
Yes, same with me - the only reason why SQ will need an aircraft of this size is when they have decided to replace their A380s with them.


Or, just like LH, they feel there is room between the A359 and the A380 that needs filling. Just like LH felt that the 748i makes sense between A346 and A388.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 906
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 6:35 am

tommy1808 wrote:
flee wrote:
Yes, same with me - the only reason why SQ will need an aircraft of this size is when they have decided to replace their A380s with them.

Or, just like LH, they feel there is room between the A359 and the A380 that needs filling. Just like LH felt that the 748i makes sense between A346 and A388.
Best regards
Thomas
LH has another reason for having so many aircraft types - it is so that they can feed the MRO business, Lufthansa Teknik. By having experience working on all types of aircraft, they can win MRO business from other airlines. That was one of the reasons why their A320Neo fleet will have both CFM and PW engines.
 
parapente
Posts: 3061
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:42 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 7:01 am

For every additional A380 you get into market sucking up the passenger volume ,the need for a 747 sized aircraft in the marketplace diminishes.This has and is being shown.However the 777-10 is the natural 747 replacement - if there is a big enough marketplace to justify the investment.Airbus should concentrate on ensuring the A380 retains as much of its present market as possible to prevent this happening.Boeing on the other hand should obviously do the opposite which would allow it to take over the 380 marketplace in time.High steaks indeed.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 884
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 7:46 am

Both could be great aircraft.

Thing is, the A350-2000 could be so much lighter.

However, as has been mentioned above about its wing being proportioned to handle additional growth, the 777-10X could be a real heavy lifter...

That's the difference I have always noticed between Boeing and Airbus products - 2 different and likely unintentional strategies: Airbus aircraft are more clinical (in a good way) and Boeing is more "balls to the wall"... that is just my opinion.

Both ways, though, lead to amazing aircraft.

The A320, A330 and A350 families are proof of this meticulous incremental almost laboratory like improvements.

The 747, 757 and 777 especially show Boeing's go-big-and-bold-or-go-home mindset.

When Airbus went big and bold with the A380 is did not work out as well as planned. Same with Boeing when they took the 'scientific' approach with the Dreamliner... Still marvelous aircraft, just not in their historical, in my mind, comfort zones...
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 884
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 7:58 am

keesje wrote:
SQ hasn't even formally ordered the A350-1000, although they have convertable options.
Probably to keep the door open for Boeing / the 777X.

A 777-9 stretch would be limited to 3 extra meters / 3 rows/ 30 seats though.
Claiming 50 extra seats is the usual marketing magic. Underfloor galleys c/would get under the floor on a 777-9 too.
The demise of the 747-8i makes a 777-10 a no brainer. The 777X structure / wing is already dimensioned for the MTOW growth.

Image

An A350-"2000" could be theoretically stretched 6 meters / 6 rows / 54 seats.
After that it reaches the IATA 8o-x80m envelope restriction (+ extra if underfloor galley).
I don't know what would be involved really in getting to e.g. 83m. All airport were adjusted for A380s too.

Would a 75 meters, shorter 777-9 have been better in combination second version closer to 80 meter, instead of the 777-8?
Sales numbers seem to suggest so.

At some point Boeing will have to build a bigger winged 787-10 anyway, if they want to seriously compete with the A350-900/-1000 anyway.
The 787-10 / 777-8 combi apparently doesnt cut it in that big & importent long haul twin "sweatspot". Where the 777-300ER used to dominate.

Issue in the background is the 777X isn't a little heavier then the XWB's, but 30t.
Better distribute the empty weight over as much seatspace as possible to reach competitive CASM.

Image

It would be interesting if some one gets out of the 80x80m enveloppe, e.g 83 meters.
In that case a bigger A380 could seat over 500, maindeck, 11 abreast.


I always appreciate your graphics Keesje

I believe a 6m stretch of the A35J would be good for at least 7 rows instead of 6. Maybe an additional 4 rows can be added to a hypothetical 777-10X?
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
User avatar
AirPacific747
Posts: 9586
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:52 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:01 am

The A350-1000 already looks like it is the furthest that airframe should be stretched. An A350-2000 would look very awkward.
 
leyland1989
Posts: 97
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 4:47 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:13 am

Is the -2000 even confirmed ?

Another "originally unplanned" stretch gives me a little bit of deja vu....

I mean.. stretched planes has never been very successful on the market in recent years...
747-8... A340-5/600...
Airbus:319,320,332,333,343,345,346,359,388
Boeing: 717,734,738,753,74R,742,743,744,74E,748,763,772,773,77E,77L,77W,788,789
Misc:AT5,CN1,CNJ,CR2,CR7,CR9,DH8,ER4,ERD,E70,E75,E90,M11,S20
 
User avatar
OA940
Posts: 1733
Joined: Fri May 20, 2016 6:18 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:25 am

I think the 777 has more chances to be built. It can carry more pax and SQ is phasing out its older A380's. Most likely it's gonna have longer range as well. But it will be a BEAST. There will be a need to redesign gates and taxiways to fit it in them. The A350 will also face that problem, but most likely to a smaller scale.
A350/CSeries = bae
 
User avatar
N14AZ
Posts: 3655
Joined: Sat Feb 24, 2007 10:19 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:25 am

leyland1989 wrote:
Is the -2000 even confirmed ?

Another "originally unplanned" stretch gives me a little bit of deja vu....

I mean.. stretched planes has never been very successful on the market in recent years...
747-8... A340-5/600...

The only exception being the B737....
 
ap305
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:30 am

leyland1989 wrote:
Is the -2000 even confirmed ?

Another "originally unplanned" stretch gives me a little bit of deja vu....

I mean.. stretched planes has never been very successful on the market in recent years...
747-8... A340-5/600...


The further stretch aka -1100 has been part of the program planning since day one.....

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbu ... PW20141222

The answer may lie in a drawer in Toulouse. Industry sources say Humbert's planners drew up, but discarded, a variant for a larger version of its new jet called A350-1100. That could provide a clue to Airbus's options next decade.
Racing, competing, is in my blood. It's part of me, it's part of my life; I've been doing it all my life. And it stands up before anything else- Ayrton Senna
 
RickNRoll
Posts: 1620
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 9:30 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:34 am

How many times do two paper planes fight it out like this?
 
chiad
Posts: 1172
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 4:24 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:44 am

leyland1989 wrote:
Is the -2000 even confirmed ?


I think that Airbus needs to add projects to its belt.
As of now Airbus has these planes under development (still to EIS):
A319Neo
A321Neo
A330-800
A330-900
A350-1000

vs Boeing:
B737Max7
B737Max8
B737Max9
B787-10
B777X-8
B777X-9

But in by mid-year 2017 (if all goes well) Airbus will only have the A330-800 (still to EIS in 2018)

vs Boeing (if all goes well)
B737Max7 - (schedule to EIS 2018)
B737Max9 - (schedule to EIS 2018)
B787-10 - (schedule to EIS 2018)
B777X-8 - (schedule to EIS 2021)
B777X-9 - (schedule to EIS 2020)
I am confused about the planned EIS of B737Max8. Some places say May 2017, others say 4Q 2017.

Boeing is also "flirting" with a MOM/NSA/B737Max10

It seems to me that Airbus has more capacity available for an A350-2000 vs Boeing with a B777X-10 (or even the already launched -8 and -9)
 
pabloeing
Posts: 571
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 3:00 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 8:46 am

The B777-10X will be the A380 dead.
 
User avatar
MoKa777
Posts: 884
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 11:47 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:33 am

pabloeing wrote:
The B777-10X will be the A380 dead.


I don't think so.

The A380 will always be in a size class all its own... Let's not forget that stretching the A380 is also possible and will increase its efficiency just like stretching the the B77X and A35J hopes to increase per seat efficiency. And yes, right now the A380 even at its current size appears too large for MOST airlines but it will be exactly what MOST will need at some point in the future, when exactly that will be is still to be determined but it will come.

At the moment there are 44 operators either operating or awaiting delivery of the 798 B77W (according to a quick wiki look) . An aircraft that can seat anywhere between 300 and 400 people. Even without Emirates that is 678 aircraft in that size category. These numbers exclude B744, B748, A346 and A388 also in airline fleets around the world. That is +-1000 aircraft in all. Who would have thought 20-30 years ago that the world would actually be using (not just forecast but actually using) that many aircraft of this size? That is why I never underestimate the potential of the A380.
Never be proud. Always be grateful.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12792
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:07 am

pabloeing wrote:
The B777-10X will be the A380 dead.


A long 777-10 will certainly be able to approach 11 abreast A380 capacity, maindeck.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 8878
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:24 am

How many launch orders do either company needs? 40 seems a bit low.

I can see the point of the A350-2000, it can be a nice aircraft to compete with the B779, if you don't need to range. But the B777-10, I can only see some airlines converting from the B779, so where do the new orders coming from to justify a new variant.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
RobertoMelende
Posts: 14
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2015 1:11 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:37 am

downdata wrote:
Here i thought SQ is over and done with VLAs. <$500 return from Europe to Australia is not helping with their profitability...

SQ is still there not over
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 11:45 am

Boeing don't need another version of the 777X family, especially an even smaller niche model, which might steal sales from the already flat lined niche family.
When a company has recently released bad news, what better way to deflect.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8361
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:43 pm

I can imagine a 777-10, but not imagine a "777-10" really heavy lifter. IMO the MLG hits its limits. Boeing is not increasing the MTOW of the 777-8/9 against the 777-300ER. The 777 just does not have the MLG of the 747, to move to a similar MTOW.
So I expect a possible 777-10 to trade range and payload capabilities for increased pax numbers. Less range less freight and more pax.
A bigger 787-10.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 12792
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 1:46 pm

A 777-10 would generate a modest increase in empty weight, because the stretch is so limited. Looking at the 777X OEW, wing, landing gear and engines, a MTOW bump is foreseen already.

Do I see a 83m length 777-10 as an option?

Well if Airlines want it & Airports can get it certified, why not, it's a paper boundary after all.
Looking at the picture in #13, you can see this 777-10 isn't just a 3m stretch ;)
In 10-20 years, monster planes could show up at the gate :D

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
787fan8
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu May 01, 2014 8:05 pm

Re: SQ to Decide Between A350-2000 and 777-10 By Year End, CNN

Tue Nov 08, 2016 2:20 pm

A 777-10? Dear god, that would be a long plane. Does SQ intend on replacing their oldest A380's with this aircraft?
Atlanta is an incredibly cool city - Andrew Lincoln

Future Auburn graduate

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