Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 4:00 am

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
The biggest question is how the aviation world will meet the Paris agreement, large steps need to be taken in the 2020's.


Have you read the Paris agreement? International aviation is specifically excluded. Even if it was included, the agreement is voluntary and un-enforceable -- there are no sanctions or penalties for non-compliance. So no steps -- large or small -- are needed.

You are correct and splitting hairs. The Paris Agreement excluded commercial aviation and shipping, with the proviso that in the case of the former, ICAO worked with significant others (including FAA), to gain consensus on, and publish an industry framework, including operational details such as offsets, trading, reporting.........

I'm sure you are aware of CORSIA.

You are also correct that participation is voluntary until 1 January 2027. However, the baseline year is 2020, whether you are in today, or during either of the first two phases, or when mandatory.

I've been involved in a series of ongoing discussions to determine outcomes, including environmental and financial, and how these are achieved with minimum risk and cost to airlines, OEM's, customers and other affected parties.

At one extreme you have countries, airlines and others refusing to even discuss involvement, let alone providing input into the mechanics of targets and procedures, the majority with a few staff attached to existing business units tasked with varying degrees of proactive involvement, and at the other extreme, three major airlines of which I'm aware (one legacy, one not and one LCC), who have formed new business units to exploit these and other changes for commercial gain (one called the Disruption Opportunities Team - DO or DOT).

For those in the commercial aviation industry (and maritime too, who seem even slower) who think maintaining the status quo is a realistic 2018 strategy because GHG initiatives are initially voluntary, 2020 is 23 plus months away, and 2026 much further, please don't complain in the future that a few airlines have got more dominant, more profitable and more popular, and the OEM's more accommodating to their requirements, because they were proactive.
 
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 862
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 6:08 am

1-2 years - A322 will launch. A simple 3-4m stretch to 47-48m of the A321LR with the ACT's removed. An extra 4 rows for 250 passengers with 30" pitch. It will beat the Boeing MOM to market by 5 years. They will probably both launch on the same day just to piss off Boeing.

3-5 years - CS100, CS300 will get 6ab cabin option as its only 4" narrower than the 737 at shoulder height. CS500 will launch which will fit a full 200 seats in 6ab for Low cost carriers. The C series will move to become Airbus's cat C plane.

6-8 years - A350-2000 simple stretch of the A350-1000 up to 80m long. Just like the 787-10 the range is reduced by more than 1000nm but CASM is fairly high.

8-12 years. A320 family will get a big cat D carbon wing. The A321 and A322 lengths will get a 1000nm range boost to open up new long thin routes. The bigger wing could allow a further stretch to 50-52m. So the family will be:
A321X 44.5m long - 5000nm range - 230 seat
A322X 48m long - 4500nm range - 254 seat
A323X 51.5m long - 4000nm range - 276 seat

8-12 years - A380NEO is launched. The A380 will struggle along for another 10 years with emirates orders. Ultrafan, modified wing and lightened structure.

10-15 years - clean sheet full carbon 8 abreast A330 replacement. Closer to the A300 in weight.
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 6:50 am

Dutchy wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
Dutchy wrote:


What? Paris agreement? Doesn't really matter, Airbus and Boeing ain't going to build a plane especially for the US and planes need to be able to land outside the US from the US and there will be another administration in the White House and then things could change again on a federal level. Anyhow, at the moment aerospace is exempt as are the international (cargo) ships, but they need to be included to meet the goal set within the Paris agreement, so getting rid of fossil fuels. 2050 is closer for long use items like airplanes.

CORSIA optional 2020-2026, thereafter mandatory. Majority of countries and airlines (including in the USA) have signed up, and supported by airport owners, financiers and alliances, although it's clear many haven't done the maths.

I recently peer reviewed modelling to optimise opportunities pre-2020, 2020-2026, and post 2026, based on airlines in growth, stable and decline modes.

For airlines in growth mode, you will see new routes, increased frequencies, fragmentation and proliferation until 2020. This may include operating a larger fleet, and retaining aircraft to inflate the base year, after which fare increases, joint ventures, consolidation, airline acquisitions and right sizing will be the name of the game. A barrier to new entrants, and possible godsend to the A380?

Still lots of questions, like how subsidiaries will be treated, acquisitions, charters, start-ups, etc.


That is a question I have, which you might be able to answer or someone else in the profession. Looking at what is happening in the world, how do lease companies or airlines alike handle the end of operation appreciation? Do they include scenario's which will see CO2 pricing and thus less economical a/c will be hit harder and perhaps smaller a/c as well? So how does the financial industry handle the Paris agreement and its implication?

Will be many iterations of CORSIA. Already working on phases 1 & 2 (voluntary), phase 1 (mandatory) and thinking about phase 2.

Given current thinking / direction, it's a fleet based strategy, mandatory annual reduction targets, with penalties for failing to meet, and rewards for those who over perform.

Given 2020 is THE base year, depending on whether airlines are 'proactive', 'passive' or 'head in sand', will determine their strategy as 2020 or even 2026 approaches (will the latter group have one?).

Up to and including 2020, proactive airlines may build their portfolio of routes, retain less efficient aircraft, up size route capacity, increase frequencies, launch marginal / breakeven routes, defer new aircraft deliveries, extend leases, retain less efficient aircraft, experiment but not adopt more efficient fuel blends, stockpile fuel........... Post 2020, the reverse, though how quickly will depend on the attractiveness / value of credits.

Next iteration of CORSIA could introduce emissions targets based on a specific routes - fuel expended per passenger / per tonne of freight.

Leasors and financiers will manage by margins and fees, as they do already. Every obsolete / uneconomic aircraft usually represents an opportunity to lease or fund a new replacement (or more), though post-CORSIA this may not be the case. Assuming zero traffic growth (very pessimistic - impact of increased air fares), the rate of new aircraft deliveries will slow, with the greatest reduction in small aircraft, perhaps partly offset by an increase in large, with an overall reduction in cycles and hours.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 7:52 am

keesje wrote:
Electrical doesn't seem realistic to me to generate aircraft propulsion. For storing the kind of energy required to move 30-50 people over 300-400NM, batteries seem heavy, slow and expensive. (And pls. don't use cheap electricity from coal plants
to charge, although 90% of the public doesn't understand that doesn't work).


Perhaps hydrogen is the way to go here, don't know, but I do know aviation will be impacted by the Paris goals in the end. It seems unrealistic to say that aviation will be exempt all the way, so a new renewable energy source needs to be developed with the associated engines and airframe.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:01 am

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
The biggest question is how the aviation world will meet the Paris agreement, large steps need to be taken in the 2020's.


Have you read the Paris agreement? International aviation is specifically excluded. Even if it was included, the agreement is voluntary and un-enforceable -- there are no sanctions or penalties for non-compliance. So no steps -- large or small -- are needed.


Besides CORSIA, exemption of aviation and ships are a peris victory. Yes, they did they lobby work very well, but in the end, they will have to get rid of fossil fuels. Paris agreement has a very clear goal: max. 2 degrees rising of the overall temperature. At the moment voluntarily, but that will be a thing of the past in the near future. It will become enforceable. What do you think is going to happen otherwise? We are dealing with a potential global disaster and needs to be threaded as such. Do you think all the countries will invest in this and they will leave some countries alone which are not willing to do their part (read America).

This is the major problem of our generation which needs to be solved and given the timeframe, it is the timeframe in which there are great steps to be taken towards a cleaner environment so it will have an impact on aviation.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 11592
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:06 am

Samrnpage wrote:
The A322 and A323 is the most logical step. A bigger frame, new wing and commonality as close to the A320/1 as possible should, on paper, be not too difficult.


A new wing, wingbox, landing gear, pylon, probably engine variant would take time and money. So far Airbus seems to have kept quiet about it, apart from some A321 Plus Plus references last year. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-airbus-aircraft/airbus-looks-to-upgrades-to-counter-boeings-new-mid-market-jet-idUSKBN185101. That could mean they are not interested or are keeping it quiet not to provide benchmarks to the competition making their own trade-offs.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:07 am

Planesmart wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
Planesmart wrote:
CORSIA optional 2020-2026, thereafter mandatory. Majority of countries and airlines (including in the USA) have signed up, and supported by airport owners, financiers and alliances, although it's clear many haven't done the maths.

I recently peer reviewed modelling to optimise opportunities pre-2020, 2020-2026, and post 2026, based on airlines in growth, stable and decline modes.

For airlines in growth mode, you will see new routes, increased frequencies, fragmentation and proliferation until 2020. This may include operating a larger fleet, and retaining aircraft to inflate the base year, after which fare increases, joint ventures, consolidation, airline acquisitions and right sizing will be the name of the game. A barrier to new entrants, and possible godsend to the A380?

Still lots of questions, like how subsidiaries will be treated, acquisitions, charters, start-ups, etc.


That is a question I have, which you might be able to answer or someone else in the profession. Looking at what is happening in the world, how do lease companies or airlines alike handle the end of operation appreciation? Do they include scenario's which will see CO2 pricing and thus less economical a/c will be hit harder and perhaps smaller a/c as well? So how does the financial industry handle the Paris agreement and its implication?

Will be many iterations of CORSIA. Already working on phases 1 & 2 (voluntary), phase 1 (mandatory) and thinking about phase 2.

Given current thinking / direction, it's a fleet based strategy, mandatory annual reduction targets, with penalties for failing to meet, and rewards for those who over perform.

Given 2020 is THE base year, depending on whether airlines are 'proactive', 'passive' or 'head in sand', will determine their strategy as 2020 or even 2026 approaches (will the latter group have one?).

Up to and including 2020, proactive airlines may build their portfolio of routes, retain less efficient aircraft, up size route capacity, increase frequencies, launch marginal / breakeven routes, defer new aircraft deliveries, extend leases, retain less efficient aircraft, experiment but not adopt more efficient fuel blends, stockpile fuel........... Post 2020, the reverse, though how quickly will depend on the attractiveness / value of credits.

Next iteration of CORSIA could introduce emissions targets based on a specific routes - fuel expended per passenger / per tonne of freight.

Leasors and financiers will manage by margins and fees, as they do already. Every obsolete / uneconomic aircraft usually represents an opportunity to lease or fund a new replacement (or more), though post-CORSIA this may not be the case. Assuming zero traffic growth (very pessimistic - impact of increased air fares), the rate of new aircraft deliveries will slow, with the greatest reduction in small aircraft, perhaps partly offset by an increase in large, with an overall reduction in cycles and hours.


I didn't know about Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation. It is a small step forward I guess. Thanks for this, always nice to hear from the inside. But given this, older airframes might linger on to 2020, but then they should be gone quite quickly and then there should be an impact on their price on the used market and thus less efficient airframes will decrease in value even more. Could it be that this is the reason that more and more airlines choose the bigger airframes, the A321NEO is most popular and the A319NEO is strugeling. Most airlines don't need the extra range of the A321NEO, so they could have gone for that route sooner. Ordering an aircraft now will put it well into the timeframe in which the CORSIA will be into affect.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 10:51 am

RJMAZ wrote:
3-5 years - CS100, CS300 will get 6ab cabin option as its only 4" narrower than the 737 at shoulder height. CS500 will launch which will fit a full 200 seats in 6ab for Low cost carriers. The C series will move to become Airbus's cat C plane.


You mean even narrower than a 737? That can not be the future, and the struggles of CityJet to kick out the Avro on 6ab is the by-now-living proof....
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 11592
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 11:12 am

There is a chance Airbus again is pulling a NEO with a possible A322/23 launch. Silently having airlines commit to 1000+, surprising the other.

Image
Last edited by keesje on Tue Jan 02, 2018 11:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 11:13 am

What kind of cabin innovations might we see in the coming decade?

I can envision a repositioning of the A330 as a LCC preferred aircraft, maybe an A330 LCC variant with standardized OEM layout and configuration.

1) A330neo with staggered seats, creating a more comfortable 9 abreast seating. Maybe combined with modified wall panels gaining another inch in cabin width.

Image

2) Stairs to the lower deck at both door 2 and door 3, placing all regular toilettes on the lower deck. One toilette for mobility impaired passengers must be on the main deck. This saves space for more seats. There is already a certified solution for stairs and toilettes on the lower deck on the A330/A340. Plus, galley on the lower deck.

Image

3) The LCC business model seldomly include additional cargo. Additionally, passengers traveling with a LCC check in less luggage. This would leave the large cargo compartments of a widebody with lots of available space. Could we see this space being utilized in a new way? One idea is for LCCs to provide a different business class product then legacy carriers. A capsule hotel, also known as a pod hotel, is a type of hotel developed in Japan that features a large number of extremely small "rooms" (capsules) intended to provide cheap, basic overnight accommodation. It is normally only 1m x 2m x 1m, or basically a bed. Could it be possible to place capsules on the lower deck? This could open up for "business class" passengers on a LCC without wasting floor space on the main deck. Passengers sit in a regular economy seat during takeoff. When the seatbelt sign is switched off, they can go down to their capsule for a good night sleep, in a true flat bed. Before landing they return to their seats.

Image

Other ideas could be children's playroom, a gym for stretching out on long haul , or maybe a bar and casino? Whatever makes the passengers spend some extra euros. :-)
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 11592
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 12:17 pm

1) A330neo with staggered seats, creating a more comfortable 9 abreast seating. Maybe combined with modified wall panels gaining another inch in cabin width.


Those no doubt comfortable seats seem to need at least 20% more pitch to get in / out of the window seats.. I think Thompson shelved them, though they still show it. http://www.thompsonaero.com/images/lopas/cozysuite/cozy_a330-300.jpg

-

IMO to make the A330 competitive on short flights it would have to let go of 30t OEW to get in the 767/A310/NMA segment. And that would mean a smaller, lighter wing, wingbox, engine, landing gear etc. Probably a 5-6 billion, 5 year investment. For how big an ROI if Boeing goes ahead with an NMA?

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
reidar76
Posts: 421
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 5:16 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 12:35 pm

Jayafe wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
3-5 years - CS100, CS300 will get 6ab cabin option as its only 4" narrower than the 737 at shoulder height. CS500 will launch which will fit a full 200 seats in 6ab for Low cost carriers. The C series will move to become Airbus's cat C plane.


You mean even narrower than a 737? That can not be the future, and the struggles of CityJet to kick out the Avro on 6ab is the by-now-living proof....


At 6 abreast the Cseries would have the same seat width as an A350 at 10 abreast. French blue and Air Caraibes configures their A350s with 10 abreast seating. It is possible to go 6 abreast on the Cseries.

The CS300 seats 150 passengers @ 5 abreast / 30 pitch. With 6 abreast seating, 180 passengers. CASM heaven!
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 11592
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 12:51 pm

reidar76 wrote:
Jayafe wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
3-5 years - CS100, CS300 will get 6ab cabin option as its only 4" narrower than the 737 at shoulder height. CS500 will launch which will fit a full 200 seats in 6ab for Low cost carriers. The C series will move to become Airbus's cat C plane.


You mean even narrower than a 737? That can not be the future, and the struggles of CityJet to kick out the Avro on 6ab is the by-now-living proof....


At 6 abreast the Cseries would have the same seat width as an A350 at 10 abreast. French blue and Air Caraibes configures their A350s with 10 abreast seating. It is possible to go 6 abreast on the Cseries.

The CS300 seats 150 passengers @ 5 abreast / 30 pitch. With 6 abreast seating, 180 passengers. CASM heaven!


Yes, 17 inch wide seats, 8 armrest of (1?) inch, that leaves 19 inch for the aisle. You can reserve a few rows 5 abreast in front for people with either shoulders, hips or both. :wink2:

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
WIederling
Posts: 6547
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 1:17 pm

reidar76 wrote:
....


staggered seats are not optimal as you create a constriction between seats.
IMU one thing would be to arrange seats in pie chart like path ( aisle seats perpendicular to the aisle )
and the middle and outer seats turned inwards ( slightly less wide knee space but more room for asses :-).
Outer seat inward alignment would move your shoulders away from the fuselage too.
Murphy is an optimist
 
Newbiepilot
Posts: 3160
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 10:18 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 1:21 pm

keesje wrote:
1) A330neo with staggered seats, creating a more comfortable 9 abreast seating. Maybe combined with modified wall panels gaining another inch in cabin width.


Those no doubt comfortable seats seem to need at least 20% more pitch to get in / out of the window seats.. I think Thompson shelved them, though they still show it. http://www.thompsonaero.com/images/lopas/cozysuite/cozy_a330-300.jpg

-

IMO to make the A330 competitive on short flights it would have to let go of 30t OEW to get in the 767/A310/NMA segment. And that would mean a smaller, lighter wing, wingbox, engine, landing gear etc. Probably a 5-6 billion, 5 year investment. For how big an ROI if Boeing goes ahead with an NMA?

Image


If Airbus can't get anyone to buy the A330-800, where is a business case for building an even smaller A330? The type of work required to get 30tons out of an airframe is likely a bigger redesign than the 777X is.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 11592
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 2:07 pm

Newbiepilot wrote:
keesje wrote:
1) A330neo with staggered seats, creating a more comfortable 9 abreast seating. Maybe combined with modified wall panels gaining another inch in cabin width.


Those no doubt comfortable seats seem to need at least 20% more pitch to get in / out of the window seats.. I think Thompson shelved them, though they still show it. http://www.thompsonaero.com/images/lopas/cozysuite/cozy_a330-300.jpg

-

IMO to make the A330 competitive on short flights it would have to let go of 30t OEW to get in the 767/A310/NMA segment. And that would mean a smaller, lighter wing, wingbox, engine, landing gear etc. Probably a 5-6 billion, 5 year investment. For how big an ROI if Boeing goes ahead with an NMA?

Image


If Airbus can't get anyone to buy the A330-800, where is a business case for building an even smaller A330? The type of work required to get 30tons out of an airframe is likely a bigger redesign than the 777X is.


Probably similar to 777X or A350 mk1. The 777X has a wider cabin to make 10 abreast more acceptable. Doing the same on an A330 NMA would create a great people mover, combined with underfloor lav's, galley etc. Still associated risks, costs, lead time would make an all new 100% optimized design a serious consideration..
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 3:27 pm

reidar76 wrote:
At 6 abreast the Cseries would have the same seat width as an A350 at 10 abreast. French blue and Air Caraibes configures their A350s with 10 abreast seating. It is possible to go 6 abreast on the Cseries.

The CS300 seats 150 passengers @ 5 abreast / 30 pitch. With 6 abreast seating, 180 passengers. CASM heaven!


Possible != doable. Almost no one did it before (Avro i.e.), almost no one does it on the mentioned A350. That's not a commercial viable solution.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2016
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 4:23 pm

The C-Series could become the A360. There's no need for Airbus to develop its own 100 to 160 seat narrow body anymore.

The A32X will be freed to drop the A319 and concentrate on A320 and A321 possibly developing a new bigger composite wing to allow higher payload and range. I think Airbus would continue to designate them as some sort of A32X rather than use up the A360 or A370 designation.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2016
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 4:30 pm

Jayafe wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
At 6 abreast the Cseries would have the same seat width as an A350 at 10 abreast. French blue and Air Caraibes configures their A350s with 10 abreast seating. It is possible to go 6 abreast on the Cseries.

The CS300 seats 150 passengers @ 5 abreast / 30 pitch. With 6 abreast seating, 180 passengers. CASM heaven!


Possible != doable. Almost no one did it before (Avro i.e.), almost no one does it on the mentioned A350. That's not a commercial viable solution.


If something like the Thompson Solutions staggered seating design could be adapted to the C-Series, 6 abreast might be feasible with aceptable passenger comfort at least for short to medium haul. I have no idea if passengers would accept that design.
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 5:19 pm

Dutchy wrote:
At the moment voluntarily, but that will be a thing of the past in the near future. It will become enforceable. What do you think is going to happen otherwise?


When does it become enforceable, how is compliance monitored and verified, what are the penalties for non-compliance, and how are they enforced?
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 5:47 pm

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
At the moment voluntarily, but that will be a thing of the past in the near future. It will become enforceable. What do you think is going to happen otherwise?


When does it become enforceable, how is compliance monitored and verified, what are the penalties for non-compliance, and how are they enforced?


How the heck should I know, but I do know it will.

But for instance, how about no landing permissions for aircraft with a higher fuel consumption as X, Y, Z. The same as regulation for noise at the moment, some a/c can't land at some places so they were phased out.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 6:00 pm

Samrnpage wrote:
The A322 and A323 is the most logical step. A bigger frame, new wing and commonality as close to the A320/1 as possible should, on paper, be not too difficult.


Agreed.

I posted in another thread that a modular type approach may be a good option to keep costs down. Base the wing around the A321r/A322, difference being that the A322 is a widebody (2-3-2). The A320r (r= replacement) a shrink of the A321r and the A323 a stretch of the A322. A lot of the same components could be used across all 4 frames, other than the MLG, engines and wingbox.
Not sure if it would work, but a elliptical shaped fuselage might eliminate the need for a separate fuselage too. Say 4.2m wide (height of A320 family) by 5-5.4m tall (width of 767) for the narrowbody configuration and then rotate it 90 degrees on it's side for the widebody configuration. Not sure how the extra weight would affect the A320r/A321r's efficiency though. But maybe the use of CFRP and Carbon Nanotube would help offset that, as well as the extra cargo capacity.

keesje seems to be more knowledgeable with that, so hopefully he'll chime in.
 
SteelChair
Posts: 409
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2017 11:37 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:35 pm

WIederling wrote:

The 222" inch A300 cross section is the "rounder" minimax design.
Reducing the fuse diameter further would lose you the "well established ULD" carrying capability.


Imho the ULD capability is one of the most over-used and incorrect assumptions on a-net.

The 767 can carry LD3s, just not side by side. Having said that, there is more than enough capability to call all the bags and have space left over.

The A300/310 (especially the A310) were sub-optimized due to a too-wide fuselage.
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 11592
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:54 pm

Slug71, not sure if this is what you describe, many vertical "oval" fuselages have been developed over the years as double or tripple bubbles. The floors absorb loads created by the non circular pressure vessel.

Image

E.g. a 3-3 + 3-3 could be relatively efficient. Airbus patented something like that, it seems optimized for high capacity short haul, a few years ago.

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:28 pm

keesje wrote:
Slug71, not sure if this is what you describe, many vertical "oval" fuselages have been developed over the years as double or tripple bubbles. The floors absorb loads created by the non circular pressure vessel.

Image

E.g. a 3-3 + 3-3 could be relatively efficient. Airbus patented something like that, it seems optimized for high capacity short haul, a few years ago.

Image


Not quite. Was thinking a regular elliptical/oval shaped fuselage, more like the A380's I suppose. In the "upright" position it would be 3-3 (single deck seating with taller cargo area) and then when rotated, it would be 2-3-2 (cargo area would be about the same height as the A320's, but wider).
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:47 pm

Dutchy wrote:
IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
At the moment voluntarily, but that will be a thing of the past in the near future. It will become enforceable. What do you think is going to happen otherwise?


When does it become enforceable, how is compliance monitored and verified, what are the penalties for non-compliance, and how are they enforced?


How the heck should I know, but I do know it will.

But for instance, how about no landing permissions for aircraft with a higher fuel consumption as X, Y, Z. The same as regulation for noise at the moment, some a/c can't land at some places so they were phased out.


In other words it’s voluntary and un-enforceable now and there are no actual plans to change that in the future.
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 186
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:57 pm

First of all, I wish everyone a very happy 2018.
I expect Airbus will have upgraded their full airplane offering by 2030.

Airbus has silently announced one project in 2017, the A330NEO with 251mT MTOW. AFAIK, Airbus hasn't published any details about this jet. I expect that this will be introduced in the early 2020's.
The A321LR was also a MTOW increase, but allowed a third additional fuel tank, and changes of door configuration.
I think the A338 could also benefit from the removal of door pair two, and addition of C-type over wing exits. (a A338 ACF [Airbus Cabin Flex]).
The second very likely development; when Airbus is allowed to take 50.01% of the CSeries program is the introduction of the CSeries joystick throughout the Airbus plane family. (more direct response)

Airbus MOM
I foresee one huge drawback for a A32x MOM; Airbus already has trouble increasing the A32xNEO production rate to satisfy demand. When they add a A322 (simple A321NEO stretch) or A325/A326 larger CFRP wing with ~A321/A322 fuselage length, Airbus increases their production ramp-up problem. The second problem of a long range narrow-body is the low crew rest area, only 45" [1,143m], instead of the 64" [1,625m] on the A300 cargo deck. In my opinion narrow-bodies should serve routes that don't require crew-rest, so <8hour flights (right?).

The A330/A340 production line is running below capacity, and with the current A330NEO demand this remains the case. Possibly Boeing dumped (sold below production cost) to many 787-8's on the market, and Airbus produced to many A332's the past decade, and now the ~250seat long-range market is saturated (no demand left). Also both the A332/A338 and 787-8 (and A319 & 737-7) have a fuselage length / wingspan <1, I get the impression this is means the plane is less efficient.
I posted a A330 derived Airbus MOM proposal in that topic, this was based on the A330-700 proposal from keesje. (AFAIK A330-700, is the designation for the Beluga XL, so I proposed A335 and A336). What if Airbus first developed a D-class wing for a ~A338 length fuselage and a range of ~4500NM (transatlantic), the A336. Later or at the same time they could develop a shrunk version that could replace the A300 / 767-300. This A335 would get a bit more range than the A336. The A335 would have ~220 seats in three class layout, and the A336 ~250seats.
Don't forget that the A321LR would only seat ~170seats in three class. The Delta A321NEO layout with 197 seats is a regional layout with (F) 36" 4-abreast First class, (Y+) 34" 6-abreast premium Economy and (Y) 30" 6-abreast economy. On Transatlantic flight Business class travelers demand full flat seats on a A321 that's 75" 4-abreast. (Delta 75S & United 752).
200-250 seats in three class layout for transatlantic is a widebody, A300 and A332 (A335&A336). I think in high density regional it's ~250 and ~300 seats at 8-abreast.

Other plane upgrades
I agree with the A350NEO when the RR UltraFan becomes available. I expect the A330 and A380 will also be reengined a couple years after the A350. Or the A33x and A380 will be replaced by a clean sheet design. I expect both the A32x and A33x will both receive a new CFRP wing (with Al/Ti ribs). I'm not sure about fuselage material, possibly Aluminium Lithium with stir-friction welding is just the best material/production proces.
{With CFRP far larger safety margins have to be used, because of the leg of deformation before failure. And fiber placements looks to be a very time consuming proces. I view automation a trade of from labor intensive production to capital intensive production, hardly any cost savings.}

The A380 or A370 replacement & A350-2000
Looking backwards, I think the A380 is just one aisle to wide. The main deck is 10-abreast premium economy (18.5"), a 11 abreast basic economy (17-18") is possible. The upper-deck is 8-abreast. The A35k and 779 have a three class layout with ~350seats. The A380 has >500 seats in a equal density layout. Looking backwards a 10 abreast 18" wide economy main deck and 6 abreast upper-deck would most likely have been beter. This could have been used for a plane range seating 400-500 in three class layout. Also the wing is designed for the larger and heavier A380-900 and A380F. I don't share the opinion that four engines in bad, or the A380 has old engine tech. The GE-9(X) are the largest engines can get. At LHR they've started to look at plain noise. The 777 is very noisy, the A380 makes much less noise. So a A380NEO, with smaller wing could use the same type of RR UltraFan engines as a A330NEO2 (or cleansheet A33x replacement). But possibly, shrinking the fuselage at the same time, a full clean sheet A370, would be a better option.
I think besides the A380/A370 there is also a market for a ~80m long A350-2000/-1100. Not at this moment, but with the growth forecast for 2030 I think there is.

I think a airline like KLM could already use A380's especially a combo version to replace the 747M. (possible future for the A380 early (ugly wiring) 20. I think a A380 combo could seat 350pax and a lot of freight (rear half of main deck).

Do more people agree that four daily flights is about the maximum useful flight rate?
4x350pax on A35k /779 365days ~0.51mln pax. yearly. Instead of a fifth flight, one rotation could be done with a A380. this works from (3x350 + 550) * 365 = 0.58mln pax annually. (the same as 4x daily 400pax plane).
Let's take Star-Alliance from AMS (KLM-Delta) [wiki AMS]. Three routes allow a 3xA35k/777 + A380 daily service. :o
AMS-ATL = 777k pax/year (2016)
AMS-JFK = 678k
AMS-DWT = 538k

Regional Airplanes (collaborations)
I think regional airplanes will be the main topic for airplane development. I think they will deviate from the standard plane configurations with the cleansheet regional planes. Possibly this will also be used on the A32x, A33x, A380/A370 and A350NEO.
ATR (especially Leonardo) wants a 90+seat regional prop. As new partner for ATR I think Spanish CASA (Airbus Spain) is the most likely. When CASA gets involved with ATR a common replacement for the ATR42/ATR72 and CN235/C295 and 90+ seat regional prop plane family could be developed. This will serve both regional passenger, freight, and military purposes.
Airbus, Bombardier and D.. could develop a CRJ replacement with open rotor engine option. I expect D.. with F.. will be the first to introduce the new plane configuration. Cleansky ...

Alternative fuels & single pilot
Both battery-electric and hydrogen are no option for commercial airlines. Battery-Electric is much heavier, it could only work on small distance regional routes. Hydrogen can't be contained, it's a bad solution for cars and even worse for planes. Because of the low density, the fuel tanks have to be much larger.
The best option for aviation is short carbon cycle kerosine.
{Fossil is the long cycle: Plants and algae grow on sunlight and CO2 making hydrocarbons. When plants get buried beneath soil a get exposed to higher pressures they turn into coal, oil or gas. This takes hundreds of thousands of years.
If we could develop a method to produce hydrocarbons from sunlight and CO2 like plants and algea do and refine that into aerospace grade (sulfur reduced) kerosine, the same engine tech could be used with carbon neutral aviation.}
I also want to note that climate isn't static, wiki: Milankovitch cycles and Solar cycle. I think Humanity isn't knowledgeable enough to really be able to distinguish normal climate fluctuations from human induced climate change by burning fossile fuels the past 250 years. I think it's very well possible that the effect we have had on vegetation could also have a huge influence.
I agree it would be beter if we moved to short cycle energy/ renewables
[Sun (nuclear fusion) = solar, wind, waves, vegetation; nuclear = geothermal(decay) / reactors(fission) & moon= tidal].
But non of these come close to the energy (mass) density of hydrocarbons. One kg of kerosine (42.8MJ) converted with 50% efficiency to mechanical power, equals 21.4MJ | 5.944kWh (~6kWh) of energy.
So for now, turbine engines with GTF to increase bypass ratio an thus efficiency are the only way to go. The Airbus E-Fan X is hybrid electric, it will use the electric fans to increase bypass ratio.

I think Single pilot with >19pax is a no go. Wasn't in in 2015 that a suicidal pilot creased a A320 into the Alps!?
:fever: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_by_pilot

Let's put a end to this extremly long post.
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 9:58 pm

Slug71 wrote:
keesje wrote:
Slug71, not sure if this is what you describe, many vertical "oval" fuselages have been developed over the years as double or tripple bubbles. The floors absorb loads created by the non circular pressure vessel.

Image

E.g. a 3-3 + 3-3 could be relatively efficient. Airbus patented something like that, it seems optimized for high capacity short haul, a few years ago.

Image


Not quite. Was thinking a regular elliptical/oval shaped fuselage, more like the A380's I suppose. In the "upright" position it would be 3-3 (single deck seating with taller cargo area) and then when rotated, it would be 2-3-2 (cargo area would be about the same height as the A320's, but wider).


Was this a Vickers Vanguard?
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 10:18 pm

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
IPFreely wrote:

When does it become enforceable, how is compliance monitored and verified, what are the penalties for non-compliance, and how are they enforced?


How the heck should I know, but I do know it will.

But for instance, how about no landing permissions for aircraft with a higher fuel consumption as X, Y, Z. The same as regulation for noise at the moment, some a/c can't land at some places so they were phased out.


In other words it’s voluntary and un-enforceable now and there are no actual plans to change that in the future.


No, in other words, it will be enforced one way or another, the exact way is still to be determined. I gave you an example how they did it with noise restrictions, the same could apply for fuel consumption. or get away from the exemption of aviation from tax and excise duty on fuel.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
DWC
Posts: 462
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 7:49 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Tue Jan 02, 2018 11:09 pm

keesje wrote:
Filling this segment with heavy overdimensioned and expensive long haul platforms isn't working. Still Airbus and Boeing managed to sell 3000 757's, 767's and A300/310's in this area. Since then traffic doubled. Maybe a Super NB could fill part of the segment.

A "Super Narrowbody" could mean a 15-20 inch wider fuselage to handle passenger movement and decrease structural efficiency restrains of real long narrow fuselages. While retaining much of the NB efficiency and offer a twin aisle option for premium cabins.

Image

I agree there is ample evidence for that market & quite possibly for that many frames in such a programme lifetime.

Now, while much shorter than your proposed A370-900 concept, the Irkut MC-21 has that extra cross-section, 3,81 m cabin width as opposed to the A320's 3,70 m. I don't expect it to compete directly with your concept nor make significant sales outside the Russian & Chinese markets ( 205 orders only to this date ), for a number of reasons ( politics, international servicing, airlines reluctance on russian-made aircrafts, lukewarm western financing & lessors, etc., but then one never knows : no one saw Embraer coming & taking the regional market, or Boeing the A300/310/320 ).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irkut_MC-21
Image

It now has two variants, MC21-200 & MC21-300, with a longer -400 version in consideration sometime in the future. The MC21 is already in flight testing & will set a benchmark cross-section wise & pricewise, if not now, then when it starts flying commercially, slated for 2020.
So whether it sells like hot cakes or not, probably not more than the Superjet ( 378 orders to date ), how may it affect the specifics should Airbus proceed with a A370 ?
Particularly considering the low russian price-tag of $71-91 million, which is already less than the non-selling A319neo list price ?
Similarly, Boeing will have to decide fast on its MoM, the MC21 may prompt that & thus influence Airbus' decision by the same token ?
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 12:35 am

Dutchy wrote:
No, in other words, it will be enforced one way or another, the exact way is still to be determined.


So something will be enforced someday by someone with everything to be determined at an unknown later date by unknown people? Wowl As I posted earlier, no steps -- large or small -- are necessary for something this meaningless.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 862
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:26 am

Jayafe wrote:
reidar76 wrote:
At 6 abreast the Cseries would have the same seat width as an A350 at 10 abreast. French blue and Air Caraibes configures their A350s with 10 abreast seating. It is possible to go 6 abreast on the Cseries.

The CS300 seats 150 passengers @ 5 abreast / 30 pitch. With 6 abreast seating, 180 passengers. CASM heaven!


Possible != doable. Almost no one did it before (Avro i.e.), almost no one does it on the mentioned A350. That's not a commercial viable solution.

I wish we could bet money in this. The C series will have at least half of its customers ordering 6ab cabins in 10 years time.

The max passenger payload weights on wikipedia already take into account 6ab. That's the giveaway right there, 95% the weight of a 737.

Ignore the cabin widths on wikipedia as the do not provide widths at shoulder height. Having maximum width at floor level like an A330 means it will be much narrower at shoulder height. The C series max cabin width is actually at shoulder height. So it is so close to the 737 its not funny.

As the CS100 and CS300 are much shorter than the 737-7 and 737-8 they can get by with a narrower aisle. So normal 737 17inch seats and a 16inch aisle like a Q400 fits like a glove. As Reidar pointed out you would have nearly 180 seats in the CS300. This is in A320 territory. At this payload level the CS300 could not fully fill its fuel tanks, so its range would be reduced. They may not even need to stretch the extra further but a small stretch to bring it up to 200 passengers with 30" pitch would make an amazing LCC aircraft and will be huge in Asia.

As Keesje pointed out they can still do a few rows of 5ab at the front.
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 862
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:33 am

Newbiepilot wrote:
If Airbus can't get anyone to buy the A330-800, where is a business case for building an even smaller A330? The type of work required to get 30tons out of an airframe is likely a bigger redesign than the 777X is.

I think we have discussed this before. It would effectively be a A310 with a fuselage stretch using Boeing's MOM's engines.

So the A330 tube, cockpit, tail and systems mated to a wing, wingbox and landing gear similar to the A310. The A300 is effectively 30T lighter than the A330 and it has the same fuselage diameter, cockpit and tail. Lots of weight in the wings.

Sacrificing max range brings down the empty weight and the required MTO which means CASM increases significantly.
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:56 am

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
No, in other words, it will be enforced one way or another, the exact way is still to be determined.


So something will be enforced someday by someone with everything to be determined at an unknown later date by unknown people? Wowl As I posted earlier, no steps -- large or small -- are necessary for something this meaningless.

At the Paris Agreement, commercial aviation and shipping were excluded, on the promise these two industries would self-regulate, establishing a firm base year (2020), and meaningful, mandatory reduction targets, with rewards and penalties, effective within five years of the base. Failure to self-determine would result in mandatory targets and rewards/penalties.

You are right. Stating the obvious, but you are right. There are an enormous number of variables, measurements, rules, reporting criteria, reward/penalty scales................

As previously mentioned, a few airlines are being extremely proactive, raising questions and what if's, providing input, contributing expertise, and giving real world feedback on likely airline and customer outcomes, described as Corsia pilots. If you work in the airline industry at senior management level, I assume your employer is a Corsia economy passenger.
 
User avatar
Jayafe
Posts: 1210
Joined: Mon Jun 26, 2017 3:12 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:11 am

RJMAZ wrote:
I wish we could bet money in this. The C series will have at least half of its customers ordering 6ab cabins in 10 years time.


I wish. These regional jets are not 6ab animals, nevermind how many extra seats the beancounters try to push in, under or on top. Engineering, operational times, usability and safety rules have shown it pretty clear.

RJMAZ wrote:
The max passenger payload weights on wikipedia already take into account 6ab. That's the giveaway right there, 95% the weight of a 737.


Using Wikipedia as a technical source is a joke in general, hilarious referred to aviation.

RJMAZ wrote:
Ignore the cabin widths on wikipedia as the do not provide widths at shoulder height. Having maximum width at floor level like an A330 means it will be much narrower at shoulder height. The C series max cabin width is actually at shoulder height. So it is so close to the 737 its not funny.
As the CS100 and CS300 are much shorter than the 737-7 and 737-8 they can get by with a narrower aisle. So normal 737 17inch seats and a 16inch aisle like a Q400 fits like a glove.


Refer to Wikipedia? Ignore Wikipedia?
Ignore data, almost, close, maximum (but unspecified), fits like a glove....seems that you are mixing wishes and estimatations to build your own reality, depending on where you see the flaws every time.
PS: a 737 seat and aisle width is not “standard” it is narrow and less (even less) comfortable.

RJMAZ wrote:
As Reidar pointed out you would have nearly 180 seats in the CS300. This is in A320 territory.


So BBD basically had a 737 and A320 killer and instead of adding 6ab they decided to try to sell the program first to Boeing and then give it “for free” to Airbus. Yes, sounds pretty logic as a plan...

RJMAZ wrote:
At this payload level the CS300 could not fully fill its fuel tanks, so its range would be reduced. They may not even need to stretch the extra further but a small stretch to bring it up to 200 passengers with 30" pitch would make an amazing LCC aircraft and will be huge in Asia.


And even then KE is already buying them, and the whole Asia buying MAXs and A32x for thousands instead of adding a 6th seat. Such a way of running business!!

Now please, let’s move to a more serious posts.....
 
prebennorholm
Posts: 6780
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2000 6:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:41 am

Slug71 wrote:
Not quite. Was thinking a regular elliptical/oval shaped fuselage, more like the A380's I suppose. In the "upright" position it would be 3-3 (single deck seating with taller cargo area) and then when rotated, it would be 2-3-2 (cargo area would be about the same height as the A320's, but wider).

The A380 is certainly no elliptical or oval fuselage. It is a triple bubble, where the two floors are the stuctures which keep the bubbles circular when pressurized. Three bubbles with three different radii.
Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs
 
User avatar
aemoreira1981
Posts: 1921
Joined: Mon Jan 09, 2017 12:17 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:54 am

SteelChair wrote:
The gap between the A320 series and the A330 series would seem to be the most obvious need imho.


If the A330-800neo does garner some sales, although with the 787-8, that may be difficult since it's lighter, one has the gap between a 225-seater (A321neo) and a 275-seater taken care of. The real gap will be a plane in the 125-150 seat market unless Airbus aggressively markets the CSeries and for the US market, creates a full supply chain there, excluding parts produced in France. Another gap will be a long-range plane that could successfully replace the Boeing 767-300ER in a passenger variant in the 200-225 seat market. American's B763s have 205 seats, United's B763s have 214 seats, and Delta's B763s (ERs) have between 208 and 226 seats (4- and 6-door variants). The main full-service European airline flying the B763 long-haul, Austrian, has configurations of 224 and 225 seats (the latter being a 6-door seat). Other configurations for long haul are/were: JL (199 seats), NH (202 seats), QF (244 or 254---the former on the ex-BA planes and 2D kept that configuration), BA (189 on Worldwide) and NZ (234). This is the gap to fill...200-225 seats with an aircraft about 200t in MTOW (most B767-300ERs are 187t, but some early ones are 185t). That said, I don't see such a plane being a narrow-body...it has to be at least 7-abreast and handle the LD3-45 container (the B763 currently uses the LD2 container). Maybe a wider A321 that can be 2-3-2 in Y?
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 862
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:27 am

Image
More than half of the narrowbody flights are under 500nm and the amount of airports accepting commercial jets is increasing every year.

If fuel and noise restrictions get worse a large turboprop would work very well. The 8000hp next gen regional turboprop that is in development would suit this design perfectly.

This design has 50+% commonality with the CS100. Shared fuselage, cockpit, tail and landing gear.

This will open up more conveniently located airports that may usually not allow jets.
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1115
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:41 am

prebennorholm wrote:
Slug71 wrote:
Not quite. Was thinking a regular elliptical/oval shaped fuselage, more like the A380's I suppose. In the "upright" position it would be 3-3 (single deck seating with taller cargo area) and then when rotated, it would be 2-3-2 (cargo area would be about the same height as the A320's, but wider).

The A380 is certainly no elliptical or oval fuselage. It is a triple bubble, where the two floors are the stuctures which keep the bubbles circular when pressurized. Three bubbles with three different radii.


It certainly IS elliptical/oval. Overall shape. I was just using it as a visual reference as opposed to the shape of the aircraft keesje linked.
 
JustSomeDood
Posts: 321
Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2017 9:05 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 5:05 am

aemoreira1981 wrote:
SteelChair wrote:
The gap between the A320 series and the A330 series would seem to be the most obvious need imho.


If the A330-800neo does garner some sales, although with the 787-8, that may be difficult since it's lighter, one has the gap between a 225-seater (A321neo) and a 275-seater taken care of. The real gap will be a plane in the 125-150 seat market unless Airbus aggressively markets the CSeries and for the US market, creates a full supply chain there, excluding parts produced in France. Another gap will be a long-range plane that could successfully replace the Boeing 767-300ER in a passenger variant in the 200-225 seat market. American's B763s have 205 seats, United's B763s have 214 seats, and Delta's B763s (ERs) have between 208 and 226 seats (4- and 6-door variants). The main full-service European airline flying the B763 long-haul, Austrian, has configurations of 224 and 225 seats (the latter being a 6-door seat). Other configurations for long haul are/were: JL (199 seats), NH (202 seats), QF (244 or 254---the former on the ex-BA planes and 2D kept that configuration), BA (189 on Worldwide) and NZ (234). This is the gap to fill...200-225 seats with an aircraft about 200t in MTOW (most B767-300ERs are 187t, but some early ones are 185t). That said, I don't see such a plane being a narrow-body...it has to be at least 7-abreast and handle the LD3-45 container (the B763 currently uses the LD2 container). Maybe a wider A321 that can be 2-3-2 in Y?


A seat configuration that gets 225 seats on an A321neo will inevitably be way less long-haul ready than one that gets 275 seats on a A338/788, United's 752s, with flat-bed business akin to a more long-haul configuration, only nets 142-169 seats, which would be similar to the seat count that a A321neo in a long-haul config would have. The A321 is still ~10m short of the 753 so it's clear that it hasn't reached the structural limits of narrowbody fuselage lengths yet. A simple stretch to ~48m for an A322, trading off range for seats, and then rewinging that fuselage length to obtain ~4500nm-5500nm range (an Airbus 757neo, in other words :stirthepot:), strikes me as a better way to address that market than making another fuselage cross section for 7 abreast when Airbus already have one for 6, 8, 9, and 10+abreast.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 6:47 am

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
No, in other words, it will be enforced one way or another, the exact way is still to be determined.


So something will be enforced someday by someone with everything to be determined at an unknown later date by unknown people? Wowl As I posted earlier, no steps -- large or small -- are necessary for something this meaningless.


We will see what the policy makers come up with..........
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
User avatar
keesje
Topic Author
Posts: 11592
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 10:01 am

.
"If you want a big single-aisle, it’s the A321LR, or it could even be an A321-Plus at some point in the not too distant future, in 2022, 23, 24, right about the time they’re talking about bringing out a MOM."

https://leehamnews.com/2018/01/03/nma-market-sector-small-airbus-leahy-says/#more-25829

Image
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
CFRPwingALbody
Posts: 186
Joined: Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:13 pm

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 1:39 pm

Smart spin RJMAZ, that ATR150. The lower part is from early CSeries materials, right? So indeed CSeries could be a 6-abreast CASM king. But the production proces for the CSeries needs improvement. (I don't want to offend someone with this statement, it was funding that created the problem. That's the reason BBD required a partnership for the CSeries).

In the Leeham article Leahy forcasted a $15*10^9 development cost for a clean sheet Boeing 797, for a 2000 20year demand. That's 7,5mln per plane. Can someone estimate what the development of a smaller wing and shrink of the A338 (A336 & A335) would cost.
I'm against the statement that engines will be developed for the Boeing 797. In fact, I think that Airbus will have earlier acces to MOM engines for their A335/A336 that Boeing. I'm thinking about a 100" fan, derived from engines designed to improve the A340, with new engine tech. A RR Trent 5000 or PW4000G of IAE SuperFan.v2. (I think RR & P&W prefer Airbus and GE Boeing.) GE could develop a GEnx version for the 797 (787-3 | 767MAX).
{side note 747-800 and 787 both use GEnx, Boeing did risk sharing. Being predicted the growth in flight number P2P (787), but if they were wrong and larger planes H2H would have been preferred by airlines the 747-800 would have sold more. At the end, Boeing forecast was correctly, and Airbus had it wrong. The 787 & A330 sold, and both 747-800 & A380 not (so much).}

Mmm, A321NEO plus by 2022-2024 and A32x replacement (A320++) by 2030. Could the first plus be a carbon wing, and the second plus a plane geometry change with >15 bypass ratio engines?
In the article it's also stated that a clean sheet narrow body should be 20% more efficient than the NEO/MAX,
15% comes from new engines, 5% from plane design. But I think Airbus could do more than 5% with their new plane geometry.
The new geometry can only be introduced in 2030, because the flight control for the new design is at very low TRL level. (And why would Airbus invest enormously when (together with BBD) have by far the best narrowbody product offering. And they have enough smaller improvements they could do [CFRP wing; new side-stick, more electrification])
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 3:30 pm

Dutchy wrote:
We will see what the policy makers come up with..........


Who are these policy makers, when do they meet to come up with something, and how do they get people to volantarily abide by and accept penalties for non-compliance with this unknown policy?
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:02 pm

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
We will see what the policy makers come up with..........


Who are these policy makers, when do they meet to come up with something, and how do they get people to volantarily abide by and accept penalties for non-compliance with this unknown policy?


........................ we will see in the future what will happen.................
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:29 pm

JustSomeDood wrote:
The gap between the A320 series and the A330 series would seem to be the most obvious need imho.

The A321 is still ~10m short of the 753 so it's clear that it hasn't reached the structural limits of narrowbody fuselage lengths yet. A simple stretch to ~48m for an A322, trading off range for seats, and then rewinging that fuselage length to obtain ~4500nm-5500nm range (an Airbus 757neo, in other words :stirthepot:), strikes me as a better way to address that market than making another fuselage cross section for 7 abreast when Airbus already have one for 6, 8, 9, and 10+abreast.


JustSomeDood, yes you have hit the nail on the head. The issue is when, this depends on engines. P&W can wind up their GTF 5% or perhaps 10%, and this will get your Plan A longer A321 with less range. The new wing to carry more fuel will need more power, which I doubt can come from the P&W GTF. Thus a pause for this Plan B whilst we wait for the UltraFan concept medium power job or its equivalent from another.

Your Plan A and B will mean that A321 or its enhanced version or versions will have eaten the MoM vapourware's breakfast with a fraction of the cost of a brand new aeroplane.

Airbus will need two more assembly plants, one for your Plan A, and one for the C Series so they will then be up to Rate 100
 
IPFreely
Posts: 2057
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2006 8:26 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 7:54 pm

Dutchy wrote:
....................... we will see in the future what will happen.................


Since you can’t answer even the most simple question about when, how, or if the Paris agreement will effect aviation I think we can now all agree that the post below is silly and no steps — large or small — need to be taken:

Dutchy wrote:
The biggest question is how the aviation world will meet the Paris agreement, large steps need to be taken in the 2020's.
 
User avatar
Dutchy
Posts: 6551
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 1:25 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:02 pm

IPFreely wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
....................... we will see in the future what will happen.................


Since you can’t answer even the most simple question about when, how, or if the Paris agreement will effect aviation I think we can now all agree that the post below is silly and no steps — large or small — need to be taken:

Dutchy wrote:
The biggest question is how the aviation world will meet the Paris agreement, large steps need to be taken in the 2020's.


Strange conclusion, since you are asking a non-politician/policy maker, why do you expect an answer? The only thing I offer is my opinion, you can do with it what you want, as I do with your opinion. I can turn your question around in saying why are you so convinced that climate change and the whole debate will not affect aviation and thus Airbus in this timeframe? Especially the information offered by people on this forum whom actually are in the known and explained it to you.
Many happy landings, greetings from The Netherlands!
 
Planesmart
Posts: 2891
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 3:18 am

Re: AIRBUS 2020-2030 development projects A360, A370 opportunities.

Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:34 pm

Why have simple memorable names, when you can..... UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) has this enormous task. They in turn have a Scientific and Technological Advice Sub-Committee. There is also an Environmental Protection committee, focussed on the practical aspects.

Of the 190 odd countries represented by the UN, 60 plus have signed up to Corsia 2020 voluntary and 2027 mandatory proposals in principle, and a further 80 plus have signed up to the 2027 mandatory proposals.

As previously mentioned, there are already three very distinct factions. Countries, airlines and other affected parties who want to press on, because they can see economic and other advantage. They are already lobbying the UN to create an all embracing cross-functional Corsia Committee, ranking above existing structures. There is support for this within the UN and even parts of ICAO, as there is dissatisfaction with the absence of firm targets (as opposed to aspirational goals).

ICAO has a vested interest in making progress. The more outspoken UN member nations are already dissatisfied with the progress sea shipping is making on the subject. There is talk of creating a UN global transport body, incorporating sea and air.

Corsia only covers international flights, but as we have seen with noise, it will extend to domestic only airlines as respective governments adopt these standards, and aircraft are hindered from over flying other countries.

Regional implementation of Corsia is likely. For example, the EU and UK moving rapidly, while others lobby for a delayed base year and rollout (Boris provided some great motivation to Corsia-related groups discussing his London experiences). Don't assume USA-based airlines won't be early adopters, irrespective of what the USA does. Corsia may trigger airline rationalisation in countries with very large land masses. For example, we might see only 1-2 compliant international airlines from China, while others focus on domestic and routes to non-Corsia countries. We will certainly see some airlines adopting Corsia more quickly than the country in which they are based.
Last edited by Planesmart on Wed Jan 03, 2018 8:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

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