Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 25012
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 2:58 pm

WSJ's Robert Wall ( https://twitter.com/R_Wall/status/1104390549795209216 ) says Airbus is not interested in stretching the A350-1000 to challenge Boeing's 777X.

If anyone is a WSJ subscriber, it'd be nice if you could post a summary.

If true, it suggests to me that Airbus doesn't see much opportunity at the high end of the market and would prefer to spend its resources on smaller aircraft.

I'm sure Boeing is OK with having the space above A350-1000 all to itself as the A380 leaves the playing field.
Last edited by Revelation on Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
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
c933103
Posts: 4846
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 7:23 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:06 pm

Airbus previously studied stretching the A350 to add more seats but shelved the project to focus resources on upgrading smaller models. Airbus didn’t see much demand for the larger plane, which also could have further weakened demand for the A380 when Airbus still sold it. Mr. Faury said Airbus has no new plans to enlarge the A350.

“We will see whether there are, at some stage, reasons to stretch a bit the aircraft and to which extent there is any market large enough to justify further investment,” he said. Echoing Boeing’s longstanding argument against the A380, Mr. Faury said demand for long-haul planes is focused more on smaller, very long-range aircraft.

Doesn't seems to have much news in it.
It's pointless to attempt winning internet debate. 求同存異. よく見て・よく聞いて・よく考える
(≧▽≦) Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan! Nyan!
(≧▽≦) Meow Meow Meow! Meow Meow Meow Meow!
You are now at your youngest moment in your remaining life.
 
User avatar
flee
Posts: 1398
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 8:14 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:07 pm

There is probably no business case for it - how many more sales can be expected in that segment of the market? Another 200-300, maybe - and if these orders are split 50-50, it is around 100+ frames for a stretched A350-1000.

Airbus should probably prioritise its competitive efforts on where it dominates - the A321 market. They probably need to make Boeing's case for NMA reduce to uneconomic levels.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 25012
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:10 pm

c933103 wrote:
Airbus previously studied stretching the A350 to add more seats but shelved the project to focus resources on upgrading smaller models. Airbus didn’t see much demand for the larger plane, which also could have further weakened demand for the A380 when Airbus still sold it. Mr. Faury said Airbus has no new plans to enlarge the A350.

“We will see whether there are, at some stage, reasons to stretch a bit the aircraft and to which extent there is any market large enough to justify further investment,” he said. Echoing Boeing’s longstanding argument against the A380, Mr. Faury said demand for long-haul planes is focused more on smaller, very long-range aircraft.

Doesn't seems to have much news in it.

Not a lot of volume of news, but a lot of significance if Faury is confirming it.

A lot of A350-1200 and A350-2000 speculation seems to be meeting its end right here and now.

flee wrote:
Airbus should probably prioritise its competitive efforts on where it dominates - the A321 market. They probably need to make Boeing's case for NMA reduce to uneconomic levels.

A321 success is marvelous for Airbus, but wide bodies are more profitable.

If Airbus isn't going to expand the scope of the A350 line it emboldens Boeing with regard to investing in NMA, IMHO.

It also makes it easier for Boeing to extract more profit from 777X.

And there's always the chance that more growth than anticipated happens in the 777X sector.

It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.
Last edited by Revelation on Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:15 pm, edited 2 times in total.
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: 14118
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:11 pm

They can /will change their mind any time in the future, but they don't seem in a hurry now. I think not even much can be concluded from this. The A350-1000 stretch came up in 2016. A year ago Airbus also indicated no initiative at that stage. If the RR UltraFan is feasible things might change.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/a350-stretch-would-need-further-engine-evolution-br-444920/
Last edited by keesje on Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15101
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:14 pm

Revelation wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Airbus previously studied stretching the A350 to add more seats but shelved the project to focus resources on upgrading smaller models. Airbus didn’t see much demand for the larger plane, which also could have further weakened demand for the A380 when Airbus still sold it. Mr. Faury said Airbus has no new plans to enlarge the A350.

“We will see whether there are, at some stage, reasons to stretch a bit the aircraft and to which extent there is any market large enough to justify further investment,” he said. Echoing Boeing’s longstanding argument against the A380, Mr. Faury said demand for long-haul planes is focused more on smaller, very long-range aircraft.

Doesn't seems to have much news in it.

Not a lot of volume of news, but a lot of significance if Faury is confirming it.

A lot of A350-1200 and A350-2000 speculation seems to be meeting its end right here and now.

flee wrote:
Airbus should probably prioritise its competitive efforts on where it dominates - the A321 market. They probably need to make Boeing's case for NMA reduce to uneconomic levels.

Yet if Airbus isn't going to expand the scope of the A350 line it emboldens Boeing with regard to investing in NMA, IMHO.

Certain posters will just double down on the A322.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
Kindanew
Posts: 182
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 11:07 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:17 pm

They would be better off reviving the -800 as far as I am concerned.
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:22 pm

We already know from their job announcements that they're concentrating on A350neo and their successor to the A32X. This news is no big surprise.

Similarly, we can assume Boeing is looking at a NMA>NSA plan, as well as a 787 MAX. For the former, I'd assume Embraer is being thrown into the mix, adding both opportunity and complexity.
© 2020. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 25012
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:24 pm

ikramerica wrote:
Certain posters will just double down on the A322.

That's the best/simplest move for Airbus, but I'm sure Boeing will be fine with that.

Making the assumption that NMA gets launched, Boeing ends up with a 737 with a record backlog, an all new NMA, a very modern 787, and a very modern 777x, and a clear path to a NSA.

The A322 approach is fine, but from what we can see it will be an 80's narrowbody metal fuse with new wing/wingbox, whose main potential customer base already have A321s on order. Airbus IMHO will end up spending a lot of money and taking a lot of development risk to capture/secure orders it largely already has in its books. It doesn't make much business sense to me, but at least a.net posters will be happy if it comes to pass.
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
 
VV
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:30 pm

Is it a good idea to stretch the A350-1000?
 
mig17
Posts: 329
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 3:43 pm

VV wrote:
Is it a good idea to stretch the A350-1000?

Simple stretch or stretch and capability increase?
In any case, wait and see the 777-X true in flight performances before.
727 AT, 737 UX/SK/TO/SS, 747 UT/AF/SQ/BA/SS, 767 UA, 777 AF, A300 IW/TG, A310 EK, A318/19/20/21 AF/U2/VY, A332/3 EK/QR/TX, A343 AF, A388 AF, E145/170/190 A5/WF, Q400 WF, ATR 72 A5/TX, CRJ100/700/1000 A5, C-150/172, PC-6.
 
morrisond
Posts: 2945
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:24 pm

I think Airbus will do the 321XLR and then focus on production cost decreases/line improvements like they have said. They need to get there Margins up to help them Compete with Boeing over the long term.
Last edited by morrisond on Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:29 pm

morrisond wrote:
I think Airbus will do the 320XLR and then focus on production cost decreases/line improvements like they have said. They need to get there Margins up to help them Compete with Boeing over the long term.


Agreed.
© 2020. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
User avatar
Slug71
Posts: 1504
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2017 6:08 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:40 pm

No real surprise really. The sales numbers of the A35J and 777X dont really justify it. If they demand arises, they'd be better off doing another type utilizing the extra volume of the Beluga XL.
 
RogerMurdock
Posts: 171
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2014 9:01 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 4:40 pm

The WSJ link in that tweet is broken. The actual article appears to be this: https://www.wsj.com/articles/after-dump ... 1552132920

Airbus previously studied stretching the A350 to add more seats but shelved the project to focus resources on upgrading smaller models. Airbus didn’t see much demand for the larger plane, which also could have further weakened demand for the A380 when Airbus still sold it. Mr. Faury said Airbus has no new plans to enlarge the A350.
 
VV
Posts: 2016
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 5:12 pm

[photoid][/photoid]
mig17 wrote:
VV wrote:
Is it a good idea to stretch the A350-1000?

Simple stretch or stretch and capability increase?
In any case, wait and see the 777-X true in flight performances before.


What does a stretched A350-1000 have to do with 777-9's performance?
 
mig17
Posts: 329
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 5:59 pm

VV wrote:
[photoid][/photoid]
mig17 wrote:
VV wrote:
Is it a good idea to stretch the A350-1000?

Simple stretch or stretch and capability increase?
In any case, wait and see the 777-X true in flight performances before.


What does a stretched A350-1000 have to do with 777-9's performance?

A stretch would be justified by a strong demand for a plane bigger than the A35K or being overwelmed by the 777-X. For now, neither seems to be true.
727 AT, 737 UX/SK/TO/SS, 747 UT/AF/SQ/BA/SS, 767 UA, 777 AF, A300 IW/TG, A310 EK, A318/19/20/21 AF/U2/VY, A332/3 EK/QR/TX, A343 AF, A388 AF, E145/170/190 A5/WF, Q400 WF, ATR 72 A5/TX, CRJ100/700/1000 A5, C-150/172, PC-6.
 
MIflyer12
Posts: 8796
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 11:58 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 6:07 pm

Revelation wrote:
c933103 wrote:
Airbus previously studied stretching the A350 to add more seats but shelved the project to focus resources on upgrading smaller models. Airbus didn’t see much demand for the larger plane, which also could have further weakened demand for the A380 when Airbus still sold it. Mr. Faury said Airbus has no new plans to enlarge the A350.

“We will see whether there are, at some stage, reasons to stretch a bit the aircraft and to which extent there is any market large enough to justify further investment,” he said. Echoing Boeing’s longstanding argument against the A380, Mr. Faury said demand for long-haul planes is focused more on smaller, very long-range aircraft.

Doesn't seems to have much news in it.

Not a lot of volume of news, but a lot of significance if Faury is confirming it.

A lot of A350-1200 and A350-2000 speculation seems to be meeting its end right here and now.


Soon enough we can go back to threads of the form 'Boeing has a monopoly on aircraft seating more than 369.2 people.' In an open market the presence of a single vendor just means that another firm doesn't choose to compete. (And, for ROIC purposes, that may be a perfectly logical decision by Airbus.)
 
User avatar
kmz
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 9:55 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 6:21 pm

The question is, what is Airbus going to offer to all the airlines who need to replace A380 and B747? Does Airbus want to leave it to the B777-9 and a potential B777-10? Currently my impression is that Boeing understands better than Airbus what kind of a/c airlines need. I really hope Airbus makes some good decisions this year, unfortunately it started not in a good way for them...
 
Noshow
Posts: 1924
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2016 3:20 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 6:25 pm

A stretched A350-1000, while technically possible, would need stronger engines. Likely supplier: RR. But RR might not be willing or able to do them right know. So this would be my first guess why they don't move this way right now. I's a true problem: Airbus can't fall back to be the small planes only guy.
 
lifecomm
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Mar 15, 2017 12:29 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 6:59 pm

This doesn't makes sense. Can't the new landing gear support a stretch? It seems the 359 could benefit from a simple stretch that sacrifices range. What gives? Is the 358 really the base and they don't want to do a double stretch? People swear up and down the 358 was a shrink.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:01 pm

kmz wrote:
The question is, what is Airbus going to offer to all the airlines who need to replace A380 and B747? Does Airbus want to leave it to the B777-9 and a potential B777-10? Currently my impression is that Boeing understands better than Airbus what kind of a/c airlines need. I really hope Airbus makes some good decisions this year, unfortunately it started not in a good way for them...


Boeing has a 747 replacement in the 777X. There is no need for an A380 replacement for decades, because the existing fleet will do for at least another couple of decades. Airbus demonstrated that the market for anything larger than the 747-400 is not very large at this time.
 
dc10lover
Posts: 1594
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2014 6:11 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:04 pm

If only Airbus didn't waste time and money on the A340 but stayed with building twin - engine jets.
Why endure the nightmare and congestion of LAX when BUR, LGB, ONT & SNA is so much easier to fly in and out of. Same with OAK & SJC when it comes to SFO.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:07 pm

Kindanew wrote:
They would be better off reviving the -800 as far as I am concerned.

How would reviving something that essentially nobody wanted, make them "better off?"


dc10lover wrote:
If only Airbus didn't waste time and money on the A340 but stayed with building twin - engine jets.

Then they would've sacrificed significant experience, plenty of marquee customers (LH, IB, etc), and plenty of name recognition.... and gained exactly what again?

True that the A346 got hilariously slaughtered by the 77W and the A345 was utterly worthless, but the A343 held its own and proved to be invaluable to them on several different parameters (sales, experience, shared technology, etc).

Also consider the risk/benefit of the late '80s development period and early '90s launch period:
Airbus was the new kid compared to Boeing/McDD/Soviets, engines for 250T+ aircraft were barely on the cusp of development, ETOPS was still restricted to 120minutes +/- 15% at the time.
They made a safe bet, and one that arguably didn't hurt them anywhere near the extent that it helped them, for the reasons mentioned above.
Last edited by LAX772LR on Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
tphuang
Posts: 5726
Joined: Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:04 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:10 pm

Revelation wrote:
If Airbus isn't going to expand the scope of the A350 line it emboldens Boeing with regard to investing in NMA, IMHO.

It also makes it easier for Boeing to extract more profit from 777X.

And there's always the chance that more growth than anticipated happens in the 777X sector.

It'll be interesting to see how this all plays out.

The more BA charges for 779, the total cost goes up and the CASM advantage it has over A35K shrinks, which makes the margin shrink also. Remember, 779 has to exceed A35K by a notable amount in CASM to overcome the RASM disadvantage it will suffer from having to sell more of the seats.

Assuming AB doesn't raise the prices of A35K more than normal inflation, 779 is only workable for airlines as a certain purchase cost. Airlines can always purchase a slightly lower capacity aircraft and fill with higher average fares.
 
User avatar
africawings
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:47 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:14 pm

Airbus should introduce something new and revolutionary to really invigorate the market.

How about this for a headline...Airbus announces new more fuel-efficient supersonic aircraft called Concorde-II, with supersonic speed and range to travel from LA to Hong-Kong in 7 hours.
 
frmrCapCadet
Posts: 4534
Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 8:24 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:19 pm

The 350-1000 has range, capacity, efficiency etc. How many airlines are wanting an even more capable plane? The 321-338/9 niches are likely where more sales are possible. Zvezda and others have observed a formula regarding the marginal extra seats of a larger plane. They generally need to be flown at increasingly lower CASM. The two large Boeings and largest 350 may be a good natural test of that.
Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15101
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:20 pm

Revelation wrote:
ikramerica wrote:
Certain posters will just double down on the A322.

That's the best/simplest move for Airbus, but I'm sure Boeing will be fine with that.

Making the assumption that NMA gets launched, Boeing ends up with a 737 with a record backlog, an all new NMA, a very modern 787, and a very modern 777x, and a clear path to a NSA.

The A322 approach is fine, but from what we can see it will be an 80's narrowbody metal fuse with new wing/wingbox, whose main potential customer base already have A321s on order. Airbus IMHO will end up spending a lot of money and taking a lot of development risk to capture/secure orders it largely already has in its books. It doesn't make much business sense to me, but at least a.net posters will be happy if it comes to pass.

My question has been: if it's such a good idea, why hasn't it been done? Airbus has watched Boeing slowly stretch the 737, and yet the A321 was launched 20+ years ago and Airbus has never stretched it, even though it would be a more direct replacement for 757s and short hop 767s that were aging.

There must be some reason that the A322 is way more complicated and expensive than Keesje and others make it out to be.

Edit: man I'm old. It was launched 30 YEARS AGO! Delivered 25 years ago. Since then Boeing has stretched the 737 twice...
Last edited by ikramerica on Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:20 pm

tphuang wrote:
The more BA charges for 779, the total cost goes up and the CASM advantage it has over A35K shrinks

Um, how?

I don't pretend to know the accounting practices of any given airline, but what direct effect would an acquisition cost have on an operational cost, such as it creates a chasm (no pun intended) relative to a competing model that the airline may or may not have purchased?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
Geoff1947
Posts: 672
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2016 11:28 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:21 pm

Weren’t we told just a couple of weeks ago that an A350-1000 stretch would come after the introduction of the Rolls Ultrafan post 2025.

Geoff
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 7:36 pm

dc10lover wrote:
If only Airbus didn't waste time and money on the A340 but stayed with building twin - engine jets.



The original A340 was not a waste. It had very high commonality with the A330 to reduce costs. It allowed Airbust to get into the long range jet market that was not feasible with the A330 at introduction. It was much better than the MD-11 trijets that were their initial competition. The mistake was in the A340-600 and 500 program that has much less commonality with the A330. The A340-600 was built to be a one for one replacement for the 747-100 and 200 but with longer range, more freight capacity, and better fuel economy than the 747-400. After it became available, orders for 747-400's declined. The problem was it was structurally less efficient than the 777-300 and 300ER that were in development. Once the 777-300ER came online, the A340 was pretty much finished. Had a more modest A330 upgrade been proposed rather than the A340-600/500 using engines developed for the 777, Airbus would have been better off. A larger 9 to 11 abreast twin engined aircraft should have been Airbus' next project, not the A380. A 10 to 11 abreast aircraft would have allowed capacity with one passenger deck up to that of the proposed 777-10X and fit in an 80 meter box. With the A350 fuselage designed to accomodate 9 abreast with 18 inch wide seats, the A350 concedes the top end of the twin engined widebody market to Boeing. At this point I can't see Airbus proposing a stretch of the A350 beyond 80 meters in length.
 
User avatar
Finn350
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:57 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 9:28 pm

Revelation wrote:
Making the assumption that NMA gets launched, Boeing ends up with a 737 with a record backlog, an all new NMA, a very modern 787, and a very modern 777x, and a clear path to a NSA.

The A322 approach is fine, but from what we can see it will be an 80's narrowbody metal fuse with new wing/wingbox, whose main potential customer base already have A321s on order. Airbus IMHO will end up spending a lot of money and taking a lot of development risk to capture/secure orders it largely already has in its books. It doesn't make much business sense to me, but at least a.net posters will be happy if it comes to pass.


777x is very modern whereas A322 is 80’s narrowbody metal fuse with new wing/wingbox? Go figure.

As some others have pointed out, there won’t be an A322. There will be an A321XLR as a low cost Boeing NMA killer, and when the engine technology is ready, there will be an Airbus equivalent of the NSA/NMA.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1513
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 9:47 pm

morrisond wrote:
I think Airbus will do the 321XLR and then focus on production cost decreases/line improvements like they have said. They need to get there Margins up to help them Compete with Boeing over the long term.

Spot on, and they have already said as much. Certain a.net posters are often in denial about what Airbus executives say, but these managers tend to know what is versus what’s dreamed for. The neo backlog needs monetizing and its a perfect opportunity to get the production systems into tip-top shape. Don’t be distracted by the next shiny new thing. I think Airbus is smart for doing that.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 25012
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:42 pm

Finn350 wrote:
777x is very modern whereas A322 is 80’s narrowbody metal fuse with new wing/wingbox? Go figure.

I did say "from what we can see" which is not much since Airbus isn't actually talking about doing an A322. At this point, it's just some a.nutters who are. If they do an A322, it's going to be hard for Airbus to change the A322 much and maintain a common production line with all the other A32x family members currently in the field and in the backlog. 777x is coming with larger windows, higher ceilings, more humidity and lowered cabin altitude to 6,000 ft, resculpted side walls, enhanced systems architecture, etc and we know the 777 "classic" backlog is essentially zilch.

Finn350 wrote:
As some others have pointed out, there won’t be an A322. There will be an A321XLR as a low cost Boeing NMA killer, and when the engine technology is ready, there will be an Airbus equivalent of the NSA/NMA.

I think there will be an A321XLR. I don't think it will be a NMA "killer".

I think there will be an A322. I don't think it will be a NMA "killer".

I believe the reports that Airbus UK is working on a new CFRP wing design.

I doubt they'll wait around til 2025 to put it to use.
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
 
Strato2
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:47 pm

This is not surprising. The 777X is DOA and there won't be any meaningful market for that size of an airplane. The A350-1000 is the absolute upper limit that makes sense going after and even that is a bit shady.
 
Strato2
Posts: 576
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:50 pm

Revelation wrote:
I think there will be an A321XLR. I don't think it will be a NMA "killer".

I think there will be an A322. I don't think it will be a NMA "killer".


You can phrase it however you like. Both of those cheap and cheerful possible alternatives will destroy the already shaky NMA business case.
 
Bricktop
Posts: 1513
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 11:04 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 10:55 pm

Strato2 wrote:
This is not surprising. The 777X is DOA and there won't be any meaningful market for that size of an airplane. The A350-1000 is the absolute upper limit that makes sense going after and even that is a bit shady.

Holy cow. Amazing how fast the Airbus fanboys jumped off the VLA bandwagon but only after the A380 got canned. Now the A350-1000 is the upper limit. :eek: As for the B777X being DOA, I find that utterly laughable. It may garner even more orders now there’s no competition for an even longer timeframe.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:00 pm

Strato2 wrote:
This is not surprising. The 777X is DOA and there won't be any meaningful market for that size of an airplane. The A350-1000 is the absolute upper limit that makes sense going after and even that is a bit shady.

What, are you going for the "most utterly ridiculous post in a thread" award?

Were you sleeping when the 777X just won a significant order from a major carrier barely more than a week ago? That it has several hundred orders before the first example even rolls out? Or could it be that you don't understand what "DOA" actually means?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 25012
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:14 pm

Bricktop wrote:
Now the A350-1000 is the upper limit. :eek: As for the B777X being DOA, I find that utterly laughable. It may garner even more orders now there’s no competition for an even longer timeframe.

Indeed.

The 777x order book has LH, EY, CX, EK, QR, NH, SQ, and BA, so it's anything but DOA.

The recent BA order shows that A350-1000 is not good enough to block 777x sales.

Same outcome was seen at EY, QR and CX: All airlines that could have just ordered more A350-1000s but chose 777x instead.

A380 exiting the field and Airbus's next CEO saying he cannot justify funding an A350 stretch is music to Boeing's ears.

The 777x has a strong early order book and the above A350-1000 market all to itself.

If that space grows faster than anticipated, and/or airlines retire A380s faster than anticipated, Boeing will make windfall profits.
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
 
WIederling
Posts: 9622
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:21 pm

ikramerica wrote:
Edit: man I'm old. It was launched 30 YEARS AGO! Delivered 25 years ago. Since then Boeing has stretched the 737 twice...

And still the 737-10 is smaller than the A321 and does not garner the interest the A321 gets today.
Cusp of the market is still below A321 size. though via the new engines upsizing has increased in speed.
( go back and look at A320, A321 and A319 deliveries over time. A320/A319 at some time had about equal share in deliveries.
year or two ahead and A320 and the A321 currentlly at 2:1 will have taken that position.)
Murphy is an optimist
 
CX747
Posts: 6435
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:54 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:21 pm

Strato2 wrote:
This is not surprising. The 777X is DOA and there won't be any meaningful market for that size of an airplane. The A350-1000 is the absolute upper limit that makes sense going after and even that is a bit shady.


This type of post only hurts the website. I guess British Airways (A MJAOR BLUE CHIP CARRIER) ordering 18 of the jets and taking 24 options has no bearing in the land of delusion.
"History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or timid." D. Eisenhower
 
B1168
Posts: 507
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2018 10:26 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:47 pm

flyingclrs727 wrote:
dc10lover wrote:
If only Airbus didn't waste time and money on the A340 but stayed with building twin - engine jets.



The original A340 was not a waste. It had very high commonality with the A330 to reduce costs. It allowed Airbust to get into the long range jet market that was not feasible with the A330 at introduction. It was much better than the MD-11 trijets that were their initial competition. The mistake was in the A340-600 and 500 program that has much less commonality with the A330. The A340-600 was built to be a one for one replacement for the 747-100 and 200 but with longer range, more freight capacity, and better fuel economy than the 747-400. After it became available, orders for 747-400's declined. The problem was it was structurally less efficient than the 777-300 and 300ER that were in development. Once the 777-300ER came online, the A340 was pretty much finished. Had a more modest A330 upgrade been proposed rather than the A340-600/500 using engines developed for the 777, Airbus would have been better off. A larger 9 to 11 abreast twin engined aircraft should have been Airbus' next project, not the A380. A 10 to 11 abreast aircraft would have allowed capacity with one passenger deck up to that of the proposed 777-10X and fit in an 80 meter box. With the A350 fuselage designed to accomodate 9 abreast with 18 inch wide seats, the A350 concedes the top end of the twin engined widebody market to Boeing. At this point I can't see Airbus proposing a stretch of the A350 beyond 80 meters in length.


One tiny caveat. French Bee and Air Caraibes both opted for 3-4-3 configuration, and (maybe?) evelop as well. That being said, if there are sufficient exits, non-ULR configuration A350-1000s can fit up to 470 passengers, give that French Bee had some 411 seats onboard A359s.
I do understand that this is just as insane as cramming 9 seats for A330 or 8 for 767. But, you see, yes, airlines may configure their A350s much denser than you guys anticipate.
 
User avatar
flyingclrs727
Posts: 2683
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 7:44 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sat Mar 09, 2019 11:57 pm

B1168 wrote:
flyingclrs727 wrote:
dc10lover wrote:
If only Airbus didn't waste time and money on the A340 but stayed with building twin - engine jets.



The original A340 was not a waste. It had very high commonality with the A330 to reduce costs. It allowed Airbust to get into the long range jet market that was not feasible with the A330 at introduction. It was much better than the MD-11 trijets that were their initial competition. The mistake was in the A340-600 and 500 program that has much less commonality with the A330. The A340-600 was built to be a one for one replacement for the 747-100 and 200 but with longer range, more freight capacity, and better fuel economy than the 747-400. After it became available, orders for 747-400's declined. The problem was it was structurally less efficient than the 777-300 and 300ER that were in development. Once the 777-300ER came online, the A340 was pretty much finished. Had a more modest A330 upgrade been proposed rather than the A340-600/500 using engines developed for the 777, Airbus would have been better off. A larger 9 to 11 abreast twin engined aircraft should have been Airbus' next project, not the A380. A 10 to 11 abreast aircraft would have allowed capacity with one passenger deck up to that of the proposed 777-10X and fit in an 80 meter box. With the A350 fuselage designed to accomodate 9 abreast with 18 inch wide seats, the A350 concedes the top end of the twin engined widebody market to Boeing. At this point I can't see Airbus proposing a stretch of the A350 beyond 80 meters in length.


One tiny caveat. French Bee and Air Caraibes both opted for 3-4-3 configuration, and (maybe?) evelop as well. That being said, if there are sufficient exits, non-ULR configuration A350-1000s can fit up to 470 passengers, give that French Bee had some 411 seats onboard A359s.
I do understand that this is just as insane as cramming 9 seats for A330 or 8 for 767. But, you see, yes, airlines may configure their A350s much denser than you guys anticipate.


My wife's mother got tickets on PS to JFK on one of their 8 abreast 767-300's. There was no use in expaining ahead of time why that was a bad idea. I figured she would just have to experience it first hand.
 
CRJ900
Posts: 2393
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 2:48 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sun Mar 10, 2019 12:32 am

Virgin Atlantic will have 410 seats in some of their A350-1000 and Air Caraïbes will have 439 seats, so the aircraft isn't exactly small.

I see airlines installing slimline seats at 30 inch pitch to add more seats than ask for a stretched aircraft as well as 8-abreast Y+ and more compact galleys.
Come, fly the prevailing winds with me
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sun Mar 10, 2019 3:02 am

Would again be a bad move from the current/upcoming Airbus management.
A simple stretch to 80 meters with less range and OEW around 140 tons, ie 40 tons or 20% lighter than the B779 wouldn't cost them too much to develop so perhaps 100 additional frames would make it worthwhile, with break even at 50 frames.
With high commonality with other A350 models, even small subfleets are justified and they can easily get a lot of exisiting customers to convert options.
I can see JAL converting half a dozen options for a - 2000 model for trunk routes where the B77W is already too small.

Quite frankly I don't understand why Airbus is so passive lately.
They went from a company that pioneers with the A380, A350, A320neo, A330neo developments, to a company that sits passively by while they let everything happen to them.
Can you imagine that they turned down the Cseries the first time and BBD had to practically serve it into their mouth to make them realise how big a mistake that was? They got lucky and financially they made a killing on that deal, but in terms of business sense, it was not smart at all to turn them down.


The loss of John Leahy's leadership is hurting this company imo.
Last edited by Waterbomber2 on Sun Mar 10, 2019 3:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sun Mar 10, 2019 3:07 am

CRJ900 wrote:
Virgin Atlantic will have 410 seats

Yikes! :eek:

Has the actual config been released? Where can we see it?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 13460
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sun Mar 10, 2019 3:10 am

Waterbomber2 wrote:
Would again be a bad move from the current/upcoming Airbus management.
A simple stretch to 80 meters with less range and OEW around 140 tons, ie 40 tons or 20% lighter than the B779 wouldn't cost them too much to develop so perhaps 100 additional frames would make it worthwhile, with break even at 50 frames.

For the purpose of what?

What you're describing isn't all that different than the 773A, which never sold outside of a Asia or outside of its initial launch period.
And in concept: describing the 783, which also no one wanted.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
GEUltraFan9XGTF
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2018 3:31 pm

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sun Mar 10, 2019 3:17 am

Waterbomber2 wrote:
Would again be a bad move from the current/upcoming Airbus management.
A simple stretch to 80 meters with less range and OEW around 140 tons, ie 40 tons or 20% lighter than the B779 wouldn't cost them too much to develop so perhaps 100 additional frames would make it worthwhile, with break even at 50 frames.
With high commonality with other A350 models, even small subfleets are justified and they can easily get a lot of exisiting customers to convert options.
I can see JAL converting half a dozen options for a - 2000 model for trunk routes where the B77W is already too small.

Quite frankly I don't understand why Airbus is so passive lately.
They went from a company that pioneers with the A380, A350, A320neo, A330neo developments, to a company that sits passively by while they let everything happen to them.
Can you imagine that they turned down the Cseries the first time and BBD had to practically serve it into their mouth to make them realise how big a mistake that was? They got lucky and financially they made a killing on that deal, but in terms of business sense, it was not smart at all to turn them down.


The loss of John Leahy's leadership is hurting this company imo.


There's no leadership in any of those products:

A380: ego trip failure / failed to read the market.

A350: attempt to kill two Boeing birds, 787 and 777, with one stone. Initial concept rejected. Success remains to be seen.

A330neo: Failure.

A320neo: nothing special about it. A new engine. A logical decision.
© 2020. All statements are my own. The use of my statements, including by journalists, YouTube vloggers like "DJ's Aviation", etc. without my written consent is strictly prohibited.
 
RawSushi
Posts: 89
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:02 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sun Mar 10, 2019 3:22 am

ikramerica wrote:
Edit: man I'm old. It was launched 30 YEARS AGO! Delivered 25 years ago. Since then Boeing has stretched the 737 twice...


That's because it's the 737 NG which was almost an entirely new plane when it was launched. Don't make it sound like Boeing was able to stretch a 50 year old design twice while Airbus couldn't do it for a design half the age. That's simply not true. The 737NG was a brand new design at that time and therefore was easily stretchable twice within less than 10 years of EIS of its launch variant.
 
Waterbomber2
Posts: 1445
Joined: Mon Feb 04, 2019 3:44 am

Re: WSJ: Airbus Not Interested In Stretching A350-1000

Sun Mar 10, 2019 3:24 am

LAX772LR wrote:
Waterbomber2 wrote:
Would again be a bad move from the current/upcoming Airbus management.
A simple stretch to 80 meters with less range and OEW around 140 tons, ie 40 tons or 20% lighter than the B779 wouldn't cost them too much to develop so perhaps 100 additional frames would make it worthwhile, with break even at 50 frames.

For the purpose of what?

What you're describing isn't all that different than the 773A, which never sold outside of a Asia or outside of its initial launch period.
And in concept: describing the 783, which also no one wanted.


What are you talking about?
A simple stretch - 2000 would have the legs to operate 15 hour flights without effort, exceeding the B779's range.
The B779's 35 tons higher MTOW could easily be eclipsed by a -2000's 40 ton lighter OEW.

If anything, Airbus is already way too late to the game, as usual. The BA order B779 order is clear evidence of that.
It's not too late yet, many of the B779 customers are also A350 customers and there are hundreds of options at play between the A350 and B777X that Airbus can swing into their favor with a - 2000.

But it's almost too late, they need to launch it this year, not wait for the next generation of engines.
Why wait at all for better engines when those engines can easily re-engine a -2000 as well as any other model?
You are just pushing a smart and limited investment down the line at the cost of sales opportunities.

Airbus should have announced the - 2000 the day they anounced the end of A380 production.

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