User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26394
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:31 pm

VV wrote:
So, Qantas will run an experiment to fly SYD-LHR with a 787-9 carrying 50 passengers.

Some people think that a 787-8 fuselage on a 787-9 would then allow to carry more passengers instead of carrying unused structure weight. I think it is very relevant to the discussion.

Obviously, a little bit of extra fuel in aux tanks can give some more flexibility.

Why would it be off topic?


Because Qantas is not doing these 787-9 flights to test the suitability of the 787 platform for Project Sunrise services. They are doing these 787-9 flights to test the suitability of the crew and passengers for Project Sunrise services.

As such, discussion about the suitability of the 787 platform for Project Sunrise services is off-topic.
 
tealnz
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:40 pm

Joyce has just confirmed that QF plans a yes/no decision on Sunrise by the end of the year. So forget about the delayed decision scenario.

He has also been explicit that the choice is between the A350 and the 778. So forget about 787s. There are other threads for discussing future 787 development possibilities.
 
oschkosch
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 3:41 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Fri Aug 23, 2019 6:51 pm

I have it! Airbus is getting the order and as a way to save face, QF offered Boeing the opportunity of publicity via the additional empty 787 flights. Could sort of make some sense?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Fri Aug 23, 2019 11:59 pm

oschkosch wrote:
I have it! Airbus is getting the order and as a way to save face, QF offered Boeing the opportunity of publicity via the additional empty 787 flights. Could sort of make some sense?

Gesendet von meinem SM-G950F mit Tapatalk


Obviously A350 is the Choice if Qantas really wish to start SYD-LHR in 2022 or 2023.

The 777-8 will not be available in the above mentioned timeframe.
 
foxtrotbravo21
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2016 2:52 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:00 am

Does Qantas really have to test out the 19 hour planned flight with 40 pax? SQ have been doing this daily flight from Singapore to New York which takes 18,5 hourd to 19 hours in its A350ULR. Qantas can easily fly its people on this flight to guage the experience just as easily.
 
NTLDaz
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:56 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:12 am

foxtrotbravo21 wrote:
Does Qantas really have to test out the 19 hour planned flight with 40 pax? SQ have been doing this daily flight from Singapore to New York which takes 18,5 hourd to 19 hours in its A350ULR. Qantas can easily fly its people on this flight to guage the experience just as easily.


Not sure how they are going to gauge the impact on their crew on an SQ flight.
 
An767
Posts: 255
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 4:21 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:38 am

foxtrotbravo21 wrote:
Does Qantas really have to test out the 19 hour planned flight with 40 pax? SQ have been doing this daily flight from Singapore to New York which takes 18,5 hourd to 19 hours in its A350ULR. Qantas can easily fly its people on this flight to guage the experience just as easily.


Why do people keep asking the same question? it has been addressed many times earlier in the thread


As mentioned in posts above CASA requires a study and data shown for any changes to an airlines fatigue management program. I am sure publicity is an added bonus but in Australia this is the law.

The old saying converted to Anet terminology.
"read before you write"
(think before you talk)

An767
If its got wings put me on it. If it floats on water take it away
 
QF7
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2019 11:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 3:58 am

Hi. Long time reader here, new poster. Given my username this seems like an appropriate thread to start in.

Reading this thread one question I have is what can possibly be learned about human endurance that NASA, the Russians, etc., haven’t already learned in space flight?

QF7
QF7
 
DavidByrne
Posts: 1437
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 4:43 am

An767 wrote:
Why do people keep asking the same question? it has been addressed many times earlier in the thread

And why are people do exercised about QF operating these flights in the first instance? You'd think they'd made a wrong decision of gigantic proportions the way some people are going on. The way I look at it, they probably do know what they're doing and may even have a good reason for it. Possibly even the reason they've publicly stated. Relax, guys. It's very unlikely there will be casualties and no fare-paying passengers will be harmed. It amuses me highly that so many people on this thread clearly know better than QF how to run an airline. But this IS A-net, so maybe I'm wrong and QF really does need our collective help.
This is not my beautiful house . . . This is not my beautiful wife
 
marcelh
Posts: 678
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:43 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:25 am

ClipperYankee wrote:
I don't know much about this website and if there is anything to it but here is their story on Boeing's offer:

http://www.airlineratings.com/news/boei ... t-sunrise/

if that doesn't work then copy and paste this link:

https://www.airlineratings.com/news/boe ... t-sunrise/

According to the link, the “compelling” offer of Boeing to deal with the 778 delay is to plug some 779 with reduced seating and adding fuel capacity. Is this a viable option untill the 778 is online? It’s also a great move from Boeing to find a new home for the EY 779.
 
tullamarine
Posts: 2140
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 1999 1:14 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:52 am

An767 wrote:
foxtrotbravo21 wrote:
Does Qantas really have to test out the 19 hour planned flight with 40 pax? SQ have been doing this daily flight from Singapore to New York which takes 18,5 hourd to 19 hours in its A350ULR. Qantas can easily fly its people on this flight to guage the experience just as easily.


Why do people keep asking the same question? it has been addressed many times earlier in the thread


As mentioned in posts above CASA requires a study and data shown for any changes to an airlines fatigue management program. I am sure publicity is an added bonus but in Australia this is the law.

The old saying converted to Anet terminology.
"read before you write"
(think before you talk)

An767

Statistically though, 3 flights prove nothing.. You would need a much higher control sample to get any results that are statistically sound. Accessing Emirates or Qatar's statistics on AKL-DXB and AKL-DOH would be more meaningful but wouldn't have the publicity benefit.
717, 721/2, 732/3/4/5/7/8/9, 742/3/4, 752/3, 762/3, 772/E/W, 788/9, 300,310, 319,320/1, 332/3, 359, 388, DC9, DC10, F28, F100, 142,143, E75/90, CR2, D82/3/4, SF3, ATR
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2894
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 6:13 am

I’m interested in how they schedule these flights as if they are doing it for crew fatigue analysis then it might be an indication as to the time of day they are planning to run the sunrise flights.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
 
RJMAZ
Posts: 1635
Joined: Sat Jul 09, 2016 2:54 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 6:52 am

marcelh wrote:
According to the link, the “compelling” offer of Boeing to deal with the 778 delay is to plug some 779 with reduced seating and adding fuel capacity. Is this a viable option untill the 778 is online? It’s also a great move from Boeing to find a new home for the EY 779.

It has to be a fake rumour or misreporting. The 777-9 could never do the route. We can crunch the numbers.

The 777-9's empty weigh will be 15t heavier than the 777-8. The 777-200LR and 777-300ER have a 23t weight difference for 10m fuselage length difference. The 777-8 and 777-9 have a 7m fuselage difference which gives us a 15t difference.

If the 777-8 could do the route with 300 passengers then you would have to remove 15t of passengers on the 777-9. That means only 150 passengers.

But it gets even worse. The longer 777-9 will burn slightly more fuel than the 777-8 at the same flying weight due to extra surface drag. This would reduce the passenger count to 100 or even less.

Flipdewaf could run his excellent flight model and show what the payload will be.

If Boeing thinks the 777-9 can do the route with 200 passenger then that means the 777X will be performing much better than expected. That would also mean the 777-8 would be able to carry 350+ passengers and be totally immune to bad weather restrictions.
 
aryonoco
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 1:51 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:04 am

RJMAZ wrote:
It has to be a fake rumour or misreporting. The 777-9 could never do the route. We can crunch the numbers.


I don't always agree with RJMAZ, but this is one of the few times I do. There is no way the 779X can carry anywhere close to 200 passengers SYD-LHR.

RJMAZ wrote:
Flipdewaf could run his excellent flight model and show what the payload will be.


I know it takes Flipdewaf a good while to run his model, but I'd certainly be interested in seeing the numbers as well.
 
flipdewaf
Posts: 2894
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 6:28 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 7:36 am

RJMAZ wrote:
marcelh wrote:
According to the link, the “compelling” offer of Boeing to deal with the 778 delay is to plug some 779 with reduced seating and adding fuel capacity. Is this a viable option untill the 778 is online? It’s also a great move from Boeing to find a new home for the EY 779.

It has to be a fake rumour or misreporting. The 777-9 could never do the route. We can crunch the numbers.

The 777-9's empty weigh will be 15t heavier than the 777-8. The 777-200LR and 777-300ER have a 23t weight difference for 10m fuselage length difference. The 777-8 and 777-9 have a 7m fuselage difference which gives us a 15t difference.

If the 777-8 could do the route with 300 passengers then you would have to remove 15t of passengers on the 777-9. That means only 150 passengers.

But it gets even worse. The longer 777-9 will burn slightly more fuel than the 777-8 at the same flying weight due to extra surface drag. This would reduce the passenger count to 100 or even less.

Flipdewaf could run his excellent flight model and show what the payload will be.

If Boeing thinks the 777-9 can do the route with 200 passenger then that means the 777X will be performing much better than expected. That would also mean the 777-8 would be able to carry 350+ passengers and be totally immune to bad weather restrictions.

I’ll run it on Tuesday when I’m on lunch break, I was going to do it Friday but that’s POETS day.

I do agree however that the 779X isn’t likely to be able to do the job. If the 779X is able to do it at 200pax then it might mean that the 778X is able to do it with 350pax. It might also mean that the 778X isn’t required for anything other than sunrise and so is cancelled because for being unnecessary. This does seem remote though.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Image
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project okay, so my Sunris researcis that Qantas Sunrirun very Sunriflights Sunrison on PS by end of

Sat Aug 24, 2019 11:06 am

Okay, now I understand that if Qantas wants to start SYD-LHR and JFK-SYD in 2022 or so the contender of the A350 would be 777-9 with at least the same passenger count as whatever Airbus' offers before the 777-8 becomes available.

That's a very reasonable offer.

It is then understandable why Qantas wants to perform the "research flights" to offer a solid argument to their civil aviation authorities and to the crew unions.
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 11:39 am

If they remove 100 seats out of 777-9, the OEW would go down too.
I guess 5 tonnes can be removed easily, perhaps even more considering the fact there's less need for loos, waste water precharge and so on.

It is possible 200-250 passengers can be achieved with an optimized cabin configuration.
 
morrisond
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 11:43 am

flipdewaf wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
marcelh wrote:
According to the link, the “compelling” offer of Boeing to deal with the 778 delay is to plug some 779 with reduced seating and adding fuel capacity. Is this a viable option untill the 778 is online? It’s also a great move from Boeing to find a new home for the EY 779.

It has to be a fake rumour or misreporting. The 777-9 could never do the route. We can crunch the numbers.

The 777-9's empty weigh will be 15t heavier than the 777-8. The 777-200LR and 777-300ER have a 23t weight difference for 10m fuselage length difference. The 777-8 and 777-9 have a 7m fuselage difference which gives us a 15t difference.

If the 777-8 could do the route with 300 passengers then you would have to remove 15t of passengers on the 777-9. That means only 150 passengers.

But it gets even worse. The longer 777-9 will burn slightly more fuel than the 777-8 at the same flying weight due to extra surface drag. This would reduce the passenger count to 100 or even less.

Flipdewaf could run his excellent flight model and show what the payload will be.

If Boeing thinks the 777-9 can do the route with 200 passenger then that means the 777X will be performing much better than expected. That would also mean the 777-8 would be able to carry 350+ passengers and be totally immune to bad weather restrictions.

I’ll run it on Tuesday when I’m on lunch break, I was going to do it Friday but that’s POETS day.

I do agree however that the 779X isn’t likely to be able to do the job. If the 779X is able to do it at 200pax then it might mean that the 778X is able to do it with 350pax. It might also mean that the 778X isn’t required for anything other than sunrise and so is cancelled because for being unnecessary. This does seem remote though.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


If they bump it to the rumoured 360T that may help the case as well and may be part of the delay. Flipdewaf - can you model that MTOW as well?

I would have to guess that if the 778 is that capable and can take 350 passengers that far that puts the ball back in Boeing's Court. The 777x could be a lot better than people are expecting, and not as big an increase in dry weight over 777W as we are expecting.

The 777x will be heavier than 777W/A350 for sure - but just think of how many heavy parts they are changing - Wings/Tail, Fuselage ribs/structure. Apparently some systems are being changed to save weight as well. Interior fittings will also probably be lightened using 3D printing and the rest based on 787 (lighter) interior parts. You would think all those are being designed with weight loss in mind.

What else is left (other than Gear-which should be no heavier than 777W, Nose, fuselage skins and wing box) that is going to be so inefficient in terms of weight vs the A350? I just read an article from a few years ago where they talk about production of the new 777X wing box - if they reused the 777W part - there would be no story - it's probably optimized as well but adopted for the bigger wing. The new bigger wing should be heavier but maybe not that much (30 years newer) and the engines should be heavier as well. The 777X will have been designed a good 7-8 years past A350 firm configuration, and they will be redesigning a lot of the basic structure that was first designed almost 30 years ago. Computers and 3D printing have advanced a lot since then.

We have not heard anything about whether or not the 777X is better than expected - but we also have not even heard what layout the possible 797 is. Boeing is pretty good at secrets these days and I would have guessed they threw a lot more resources(making it lighter) at it once they saw how good the A351 was going to be and with the lessons learned from 789 and 781. They would have been insane not too.

The proof may be in the pudding in terms of the 777X still getting orders over the A351.

The 778 may not be needed if they can take the 779 to 360T and it turns out better than we are expecting on ANet. A 360T 779 may not be Project Sunrise capable but it may be why the ME3 are looking like they don't want the 778 anymore. It sure does open up the possibility of an 777-10 though with still pretty good range.

A lighter than expected structure and 360T may also bring into the realm of possibility the F model being based on the 9 vs 8 as well. The interior volume could be very useful as an 748F replacement.
 
Scotron12
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 12:43 pm

Anyone figured out the flying time a 787-9 will take LHR/JFK to SYD?
 
patrickjp93
Posts: 389
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2019 12:00 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:19 pm

tealnz wrote:
We have been over this before. This isn't just about London. It is about a push by QF to replace one-stop long services with non-stop point to point as the basis for its long-haul strategy. We are talking about a fleet which in time is likely to have 20+ frames.

And QF want a common type for that fleet. (Though we can guess they will have a ULR sub-fleet for the extreme range routes – at least SYD/MEL to LHR and NYC). Assuming they choose the A35K, as now seems likely, they will ultimately want to use the same type for SYD/MEL/BNE to a long list of destinations in the Americas, Europe and Asia – pax-only for the more demanding destinations, regular payloads for the shorter routes.

The 789 will not/not work as a basis for the Sunrise fleet. PER-LHR and BNE-ORD tell you what the limits of the airframe are. The reality is that QF want an aircraft that can do ORD and LHR non-stop from SYD. They will find other good uses for the 789s.

Don't know about 20+ frames for just 6 routes. Qantas keeps 2.5 planes for each of its circular long-haul routes and 2.2 for co-located routes, such as LAX to BNE/SYD/MEL, where you only need 1 spare plane at LAX in case things get sour with maintenance (not to mention the one docked at JFK in absolute emergencies), and one spare at Sydney, which is how they currently run them. That's why my bet for Qantas was 10-15 frames, depending on whether or not BNE/MEL-JFK on their own are actually viable (and maybe BNE feeds MEL or vice-versa to make 2 flights viable). Can't much complain about 1 stopover in Sydney/Melbourne when it comes down to economics, and the layovers would be very short.

And my wonder in all of this is why Boeing and GE haven't considered pushing an NG model of the 787 to meet the job. The GE9X has been providing the GEnx lots of PIP items. I wonder if they can scale the 9X down somewhat and keep the efficiency. That and a couple tweaks to the 789's frame and tanks (maybe folding wingtips on a longer wing?) would probably be an excellent option, as it means fewer types in Qantas' fleet, good for costs all around.
 
aryonoco
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 1:51 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:21 pm

Scotron12 wrote:
Anyone figured out the flying time a 787-9 will take LHR/JFK to SYD?


LHR is longer, depends on the winds, as well as the routes they take. I remember reading that QF might fly the polar route over Alaska instead of the more direct westward route.

So SYD/MEL-LHR are somewhere around 20 to 22 hours depending on the conditions and the flight route of the day.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:32 pm

morrisond wrote:
flipdewaf wrote:
RJMAZ wrote:
It has to be a fake rumour or misreporting. The 777-9 could never do the route. We can crunch the numbers.

The 777-9's empty weigh will be 15t heavier than the 777-8. The 777-200LR and 777-300ER have a 23t weight difference for 10m fuselage length difference. The 777-8 and 777-9 have a 7m fuselage difference which gives us a 15t difference.

If the 777-8 could do the route with 300 passengers then you would have to remove 15t of passengers on the 777-9. That means only 150 passengers.

But it gets even worse. The longer 777-9 will burn slightly more fuel than the 777-8 at the same flying weight due to extra surface drag. This would reduce the passenger count to 100 or even less.

Flipdewaf could run his excellent flight model and show what the payload will be.

If Boeing thinks the 777-9 can do the route with 200 passenger then that means the 777X will be performing much better than expected. That would also mean the 777-8 would be able to carry 350+ passengers and be totally immune to bad weather restrictions.

I’ll run it on Tuesday when I’m on lunch break, I was going to do it Friday but that’s POETS day.

I do agree however that the 779X isn’t likely to be able to do the job. If the 779X is able to do it at 200pax then it might mean that the 778X is able to do it with 350pax. It might also mean that the 778X isn’t required for anything other than sunrise and so is cancelled because for being unnecessary. This does seem remote though.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


If they bump it to the rumoured 360T that may help the case as well and may be part of the delay. Flipdewaf - can you model that MTOW as well?

I would have to guess that if the 778 is that capable and can take 350 passengers that far that puts the ball back in Boeing's Court. The 777x could be a lot better than people are expecting, and not as big an increase in dry weight over 777W as we are expecting.

The 777x will be heavier than 777W/A350 for sure - but just think of how many heavy parts they are changing - Wings/Tail, Fuselage ribs/structure. Apparently some systems are being changed to save weight as well. Interior fittings will also probably be lightened using 3D printing and the rest based on 787 (lighter) interior parts. You would think all those are being designed with weight loss in mind.

What else is left (other than Gear-which should be no heavier than 777W, Nose, fuselage skins and wing box) that is going to be so inefficient in terms of weight vs the A350? I just read an article from a few years ago where they talk about production of the new 777X wing box - if they reused the 777W part - there would be no story - it's probably optimized as well but adopted for the bigger wing. The new bigger wing should be heavier but maybe not that much (30 years newer) and the engines should be heavier as well. The 777X will have been designed a good 7-8 years past A350 firm configuration, and they will be redesigning a lot of the basic structure that was first designed almost 30 years ago. Computers and 3D printing have advanced a lot since then.

We have not heard anything about whether or not the 777X is better than expected - but we also have not even heard what layout the possible 797 is. Boeing is pretty good at secrets these days and I would have guessed they threw a lot more resources(making it lighter) at it once they saw how good the A351 was going to be and with the lessons learned from 789 and 781. They would have been insane not too.

The proof may be in the pudding in terms of the 777X still getting orders over the A351.

The 778 may not be needed if they can take the 779 to 360T and it turns out better than we are expecting on ANet. A 360T 779 may not be Project Sunrise capable but it may be why the ME3 are looking like they don't want the 778 anymore. It sure does open up the possibility of an 777-10 though with still pretty good range.

A lighter than expected structure and 360T may also bring into the realm of possibility the F model being based on the 9 vs 8 as well. The interior volume could be very useful as an 748F replacement.



Very well written statement you have made. Great job!
Whatever
 
mig17
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:34 pm

Image
I tried to show how different aircraft would performe on LHR/SYD. Several aircraft can do it. But with a significant payload and fuel efficiently is another story.

Considering the 777-200LR hasn't been deemed economical enough for 15 years, 781, A332, 77W, 788, 744, A339, 789 (254t), 748, 779 (351t) and A388 are out.

Interestingly, the A338 without any modification can fly the route with around 125 pax and with better economics than the 77L. So does a 260t MTOW 789 with more than 140 pax. The A338 and 260t 789 maybe the lower risk ULH planes to begin with, but the 280t A359 and it's ULR version will offer more payload and efficiency than both.

Now with current info on the A35K and 778, there is no battle, the 319t A350-1000 can do it more efficiently and with more payload than the 778 ...
But I have simulated a 777-X boost with a 360t MTOW for both 778 and 779. The 779+ could carry 170 pax but with similar efficiency than a 77L. The 778 on the other hand would be on a par with A35K but only for LHR/SYD flight.

I have also simulated a 788 with the 260t MTOW of the 789/1. And that plane would carry 240 pax with the same efficiency has larger A35K and 778+. But that plane doesn't exist : Maybe Boeing should have developpe more the 788 rather than building the 778 ... By the way, the same can be said of a A359 319t MTOW.
Last edited by mig17 on Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:57 pm, edited 5 times in total.
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.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 1:52 pm

Anyone here trying to model what the new 77X can do is just kidding themselves. We know generally what it can do, but we also don’t know what Boeing is doing behind the scenes and exactly how it will perform in real life.

Until it flies and Boeing has hard data, it’s all conjecture at this point. My bet is that Boeing has under promised and it will over perform. By how much is anyone’s guess.

At the end of the day, we do not know what Boeing has up their sleeves and do not know how many passengers the 777-9 could theoretically carry on this route (SYD-LHR). We won’t know for another 6-12 months (assuming it flies early next year).

For all those pretending to really know, just sit back wait for the hard data before jumping to conclusions. At this point, it’s all ‘paper performance’ still.

I’m taking a rational and open-minded approach to this and waiting for actual numbers with flight testing and real-world data from airlines before drawing a final conclusion.
Whatever
 
musman9853
Posts: 831
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 12:30 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:06 pm

flipdewaf wrote:
I’m interested in how they schedule these flights as if they are doing it for crew fatigue analysis then it might be an indication as to the time of day they are planning to run the sunrise flights.

Fred


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


what slots do they have in LHR? that would limit them, no?
Welcome to the City Beautiful.
 
mig17
Posts: 230
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2016 8:34 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 2:09 pm

FriscoHeavy wrote:
My bet is that Boeing has under promised and it will over perform. By how much is anyone’s guess.

Yes they have, but by which margin will be decisive. Because in the meantime Airbus has improved the A350 faster and higher than expected in term of MTOW and may still have some margin themself.
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.
 
Scotron12
Posts: 141
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:13 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 4:11 pm

Wouldn't surprise me if the data gathered from these test flights would also go back to Boeing to give a measurment for upgrades to both 787-9 and 787-10.

Although Joyce has stated only the A350 and 777X are being considered...it doesn't hurt to get information for future use.
 
User avatar
exFWAOONW
Posts: 666
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 10:32 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 4:22 pm

Everyone is so concerned about these two flights. Technically they are possible. QA has stated they are looking at the economic case. These flights will not operate in a vacuum by themselves.

My question, is what impact on their existing one-stop flights will these non-stops have? There is still traffic to the intermediate points to carry. How will they be able to backfill their schedule to these profitably? It’s not just about the planes for only one or two flights.
Is just me, or is flying not as much fun anymore?
 
User avatar
SQ32
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 2:18 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 4:26 pm

Technically 778 is impossible for the Qantas time line, and it may never be built.

Only A351 ULR is on the table.
 
User avatar
lightsaber
Moderator
Posts: 18136
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 10:55 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 4:29 pm

exFWAOONW wrote:
Everyone is so concerned about these two flights. Technically they are possible. QA has stated they are looking at the economic case. These flights will not operate in a vacuum by themselves.

My question, is what impact on their existing one-stop flights will these non-stops have? There is still traffic to the intermediate points to carry. How will they be able to backfill their schedule to these profitably? It’s not just about the planes for only one or two flights.

QF doesn't want to share as much revenue with EK. There are 3 flights per day to Dubai. O&D is one.

To LAX they collect passenger from MEL and SYD and continue to JFK. By bypassing, less revenue shared with AA.

This is a business, not a technical decision.
IM messages to mods on warnings and bans will be ignored and nasty ones will result in a ban.
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:28 pm

SQ32 wrote:
Technically 778 is impossible for the Qantas time line, and it may never be built.

Only A351 ULR is on the table.


No, SQ32, the A351 ULR isn't the only option on the table. If that was the case and it could be done economically (i.e. the business had been made for it), QF would have already pulled the trigger. Since they haven't, that either indicates A. it can't do it economically or B. there are other options (from Boeing) on the table.

Don't try to spin this into something it isn't.
Whatever
 
FriscoHeavy
Posts: 1601
Joined: Tue May 27, 2014 4:31 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:34 pm

mig17 wrote:
FriscoHeavy wrote:
My bet is that Boeing has under promised and it will over perform. By how much is anyone’s guess.

Yes they have, but by which margin will be decisive. Because in the meantime Airbus has improved the A350 faster and higher than expected in term of MTOW and may still have some margin themself.


And they 77X will have upgrades, improved weights, etc along the way as well. All planes, from both manufacturers continue to improve all the time over the years. So to think that the first 77X that comes off the line will be as good as the 100th, or 150th, or 200th is silly. At some point along the way, improvements will be found and made. Again, Airbus and Boeing both do this.

People on here speak as if they know exactly how the 77X will perform and exactly what upgrades will happen to it over the next few years when in reality, they haven't a clue. No one knows at this point. Just as we speculate about what XXXXUUULLLRRRR Airbus comes up with next, we won't know until they announce it, but of course they are working on upgrades across all models, all the time.

It's very exciting to see both manufacturers really push technology to the limit. Just when everyone on here states that XYZ model can't possibly make anymore gains and that it's 'maxed out', they (Airbus and Boeing) usually find a way to eek out a half-percent here, one-percent there. It's really quite fascinating.
Whatever
 
anrec80
Posts: 2107
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 7:50 am

Re: Qantas plans to operate 3 Project Sunrise research flights by end of 2019 using 787-9

Sat Aug 24, 2019 5:39 pm

musman9853 wrote:
so probably only a few test runs, right? because no way you can make money off 40 pax


Well if these 40 pax are all full fare F - then you can. But even if you can consistently fill the flight with 100-120 all J - then 789 may make money on such run.
 
tealnz
Posts: 575
Joined: Mon Nov 09, 2015 10:47 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 6:34 pm

patrickjp93 wrote:
Don't know about 20+ frames for just 6 routes. Qantas keeps 2.5 planes for each of its circular long-haul routes and 2.2 for co-located routes, such as LAX to BNE/SYD/MEL, where you only need 1 spare plane at LAX in case things get sour with maintenance (not to mention the one docked at JFK in absolute emergencies), and one spare at Sydney, which is how they currently run them. That's why my bet for Qantas was 10-15 frames, depending on whether or not BNE/MEL-JFK on their own are actually viable (and maybe BNE feeds MEL or vice-versa to make 2 flights viable). Can't much complain about 1 stopover in Sydney/Melbourne when it comes down to economics, and the layovers would be very short.

Like I say, we have been over this before. If you think we are only talking about six routes you haven't been following what Joyce has been saying. Yes, there will be a handful of ULR sectors (LHR, NYC, ORD, possibly CDG, FRA, and eventually YYZ, MIA). And there will be some very long sectors that would be better served by a high-weight 35K than an A380 (DFW, GRU/GIG). Plus a bunch of Asian destinations – Joyce hasn't said which ones but he has said that they will use the Sunrise fleet for those routes as well as for long haul. You can make your own guess about which of these will be served from SYD, MEL, BNE and PER. And yes, some might continue to be served by the 789.

But you need to understand that Joyce is looking at a big fleet of a single type, presumably with a sub-fleet (at least seven) of the ULR variant. Single pilot pool, common maintenance and training, interchangeability across the fleet for most purposes. Run the numbers. You can easily get to 20+ with plausible assumptions about which destinations will be served from where.

patrickjp93 wrote:
And my wonder in all of this is why Boeing and GE haven't considered pushing an NG model of the 787 to meet the job. The GE9X has been providing the GEnx lots of PIP items. I wonder if they can scale the 9X down somewhat and keep the efficiency. That and a couple tweaks to the 789's frame and tanks (maybe folding wingtips on a longer wing?) would probably be an excellent option, as it means fewer types in Qantas' fleet, good for costs all around.

And my wonder in all of this is why so many a.netters are stuck in fantasy mode on anything 787-related. Yes, we will see a neo version of the 787 at some point. But right now there is no new engine and Boeing have their hands full with the MAX, 77X and NMA. We don't even have confirmation there are engineering mods on the 78Js that NZ ordered. The fact that the NZ CEO said they will operate mainly on Asian routes suggests that any near-term improvements on the 787 are going to be minor.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 13990
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sat Aug 24, 2019 9:57 pm

musman9853 wrote:

what slots do they have in LHR? that would limit them, no?


If I recall correctly QF have one slot on lease to BA (May have been the old SYD-BKK-LHR flight) The timings of their arrival and departure slots are rather fixed in LHR, which means the aircraft are on the ground in LHR for a few hours.

LHR and SYD have nighttime curfews, both have “daylight savings/summer times”, this in addition to the long sector times only give certain windows when flights can be scheduled.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
aryonoco
Posts: 673
Joined: Fri May 11, 2012 1:51 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 1:07 am

zeke wrote:

If I recall correctly QF have one slot on lease to BA


I believe they currently have leased two LHR slots to BA, which they can take back.

QF has more flexibility in its LHR operations than a lot of other airlines so I don't think that will be a problem.
 
DWC
Posts: 608
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2017 7:49 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:38 am

tealnz wrote:
This isn't just about London. It is about a push by QF to replace one-stop long services with non-stop point to point as the basis for its long-haul strategy. We are talking about a fleet which in time is likely to have 20+ frames.

tullamarine wrote:
the economics are extremely marginal. QF have obviously calculated that they need a certain volume before it can even approach profitability which is why the A359ULR was discounted; thoughts of a 788ER are obviously even more so. QF will need to operate a premium heavy format even though it may be nominally 4 class. For MEL-LHR to be a goer, the existing QF9 via PER will need to find its premium pax elsewhere as QF will want all the premium pax out of MEL on the non-stop service. If PER-LHR can't fill the 789's J class by itself, maybe BNE-PER-LHR is an option though I can't see this route being any quicker than going via SIN or DXB.

mig17 wrote:
Image
I tried to show how different aircraft would performe on LHR/SYD. Several aircraft can do it. But with a significant payload and fuel efficiently is another story.

What is the additionnal cost to QF's direct ULH service strategy ?
and specifically for PER-LHR so we can have an idea for JFK ?


Question to all, don't flame me :) but truth be told, transporting twice the fuel, the fuel needed to transport the fuel for the second half of the flight ( as opposed to a ME3 one-stop service ? ) may content av geeks, QF's & premium pax perspectives, but is an appallingly inefficient use of it, as fuel is a limited & expensive commodity, in fact a "public good" like air or water that some say should be exhausted before the century is out. It doesn't matter that engines get better, with travel exploding, it is still using up unnecessary ressources for the benefit of a happy few.
This is one example of externalizing the cost to the environment & to future generations by inconsiderate depletion of fossil carbon ( unless synthetic production makes up for it one day ). I realize it is perhaps the only way for QF to exist globally, but that does not help the planet.
Last edited by DWC on Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:46 am

SQ32 wrote:
Technically 778 is impossible for the Qantas time line, and it may never be built.

Only A351 ULR is on the table.


What is exactly A350-1000 ULR?

Is it something that needs to be develop?
It doesn't sound like a regular A350-1000. What are the differences between a normal A350-1000 and an A350-1000 ULR?
If the difference is significant, how long is the development time?
 
User avatar
SQ32
Posts: 56
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 2:18 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:38 am

Airbus just need strengthening center fuselage, landing gear, in addition of a cargo fuel tank. All are incremental improvement that does not require that much investment.

VV wrote:
SQ32 wrote:
Technically 778 is impossible for the Qantas time line, and it may never be built.

Only A351 ULR is on the table.


What is exactly A350-1000 ULR?

Is it something that needs to be develop?
It doesn't sound like a regular A350-1000. What are the differences between a normal A350-1000 and an A350-1000 ULR?
If the difference is significant, how long is the development time?
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:20 pm

SQ32

It may sound simple.
However there are other industrial questions like whether the landing gear you mentioned woul become standard and thus every single post Project Sunrise A350-1000 will be less optimized for normal missions.

In addition the possible additional fuel tanks you mentioned will need a different fuel system, including the flight management software changes (plumbing, fuel pumps, fuel quantity, CG vector, etc.).

The whole damn thing will need engineering hours plus the certification.

I would never say that it "does not require that much investment".

You know your statement is not right, don't you?

SQ32 wrote:
Airbus just need strengthening center fuselage, landing gear, in addition of a cargo fuel tank. All are incremental improvement that does not require that much investment.

VV wrote:
="SQ32"]

What is exactly A350-1000 ULR?

Is it something that needs to be develop?
It doesn't sound like a regular A350-1000. What are the differences between a normal A350-1000 and an A350-1000 ULR?
If the difference is significant, how long is the development time?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26394
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 3:20 pm

VV wrote:
What is exactly A350-1000ULR?


There is nothing official from Airbus in terms of changes and specifications, but the (informed) speculation is that it will be similar to the A350-900ULR. So changes would include:

Modifications to the fuel control software and fuel venting/inerting hardware to allow more of the existing fuel tank volume to be used. The baseline A350-1000 can tank up to 156,000 liters and the A350-900ULR can tank up to 165,000 liters compared to 138/141,000 on the baseline A350-900.

Possibly higher operating weights. The A350-1000 can currently be specified with MTOWs of up to 319,000kg and there is a belief Airbus can get another few thousand on top of that with a ULR model to support the higher fuel loads.

As for development and certification, Airbus was able to do it with the A350-900ULR within a few years (if that) and they already have all that to draw from for the A350-1000, so arguably it could probably be certified within a year or so (if that).
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:00 pm

Stitch wrote:
VV wrote:
What is exactly A350-1000ULR?


There is nothing official from Airbus in terms of changes and specifications, but the (informed) speculation is that it will be similar to the A350-900ULR. So changes would include:

Modifications to the fuel control software and fuel venting/inerting hardware to allow more of the existing fuel tank volume to be used. The baseline A350-1000 can tank up to 156,000 liters and the A350-900ULR can tank up to 165,000 liters compared to 138/141,000 on the baseline A350-900.

Possibly higher operating weights. The A350-1000 can currently be specified with MTOWs of up to 319,000kg and there is a belief Airbus can get another few thousand on top of that with a ULR model to support the higher fuel loads.

As for development and certification, Airbus was able to do it with the A350-900ULR within a few years (if that) and they already have all that to draw from for the A350-1000, so arguably it could probably be certified within a year or so (if that).


Unless there's a creeping requirement, especially from fuel volume perspective, considering the fact A350-1000 is much heavier than A350-900 ( hence more fuel requirement).

I never believe"simple aircraft development" and this one is not different.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26394
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 4:36 pm

VV wrote:
Unless there's a creeping requirement, especially from fuel volume perspective, considering the fact A350-1000 is much heavier than A350-900 ( hence more fuel requirement). I never believe "simple aircraft development" and this one is not different.


The A350-1000 is a larger frame designed for longer missions so that is why it has a larger wingbox fuel tank compared to the A350-900. The baseline A350-1000 has a higher design range than the A350-900 because it has the ability to tank more fuel (via both volume and weight). So this should indeed be a "simple aircraft development", especially since Airbus has already done this for the A350-900ULR so they can directly apply the same changes to the A350-1000ULR.
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:07 pm

Stitch wrote:
VV wrote:
Unless there's a creeping requirement, especially from fuel volume perspective, considering the fact A350-1000 is much heavier than A350-900 ( hence more fuel requirement). I never believe "simple aircraft development" and this one is not different.


The A350-1000 is a larger frame designed for longer missions so that is why it has a larger wingbox fuel tank compared to the A350-900. The baseline A350-1000 has a higher design range than the A350-900 because it has the ability to tank more fuel (via both volume and weight). So this should indeed be a "simple aircraft development", especially since Airbus has already done this for the A350-900ULR so they can directly apply the same changes to the A350-1000ULR.


The highlighted part is absolutely wrong.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17477
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:11 pm

VV wrote:
Stitch wrote:
VV wrote:
Unless there's a creeping requirement, especially from fuel volume perspective, considering the fact A350-1000 is much heavier than A350-900 ( hence more fuel requirement). I never believe "simple aircraft development" and this one is not different.


The A350-1000 is a larger frame designed for longer missions so that is why it has a larger wingbox fuel tank compared to the A350-900. The baseline A350-1000 has a higher design range than the A350-900 because it has the ability to tank more fuel (via both volume and weight). So this should indeed be a "simple aircraft development", especially since Airbus has already done this for the A350-900ULR so they can directly apply the same changes to the A350-1000ULR.


The highlighted part is absolutely wrong.


Please feel absolutely free to supply supporting evidence that you're right.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26394
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 8:46 pm

Stitch wrote:
The A350-1000 is a larger frame designed for longer missions so that is why it has a larger wingbox fuel tank compared to the A350-900.

VV wrote:
The highlighted part is absolutely wrong.


I can't speak to the possible physical volume since that information is not publicly available (I believe it is listed in the FCOMs, but those are proprietary so those who have access to them need to decide whether or not they wish to make that info public here), but in terms of publicly available information for the baseline models - which is what I clearly noted I was referring to:

EASA TCDS for the A350-900 (section 2.2 - Fuel quantity) 09 August 2019:
https://www.easa.europa.eu/sites/defaul ... -08-09.pdf

A350-900 Center Tank Usable Fuel: 80,947 liters
A350-1000 Center Tank Center Usable Fuel: 99,917 liters

Leeham.net spoke with Airbus shortly after the launch of the A350-900ULR, and they were told by Airbus that the baseline A350-900 center tank could hold 80,947 liters and the baseline A350-1000 center tank could hold 109,244 liters. The wingbox was roomy enough, however, to allow even more fuel to be loaded, which is why the A350-900ULR could lift so much more usable fuel then the baseline A350-900.

To quote the article: "It is all a matter of where the fuel computer and its sensors put the volume cut-off for the different fuel compartments and how routing of inert gas etc. gets adapted to the higher levels. So all the same base wingbox, just utilized to different levels."

Airbus Firefighter Guides for the A350 family:
https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... 50_900.pdf
https://www.airbus.com/content/dam/corp ... 0_1000.pdf

A350-900 Center Tank: 80,947 liters
A350-1000 Center Tank: 109,244 liters
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 8515
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 9:01 pm

There is a difference between the wing of the A350-900 and the A350-1000. That does not preclude that the wing box, the center tank and the wing tanks could be the same for both frames. As the A350-900ULR does not need extra tanks, but only uses the available volume in wing and center tanks, we can assume, that that volume will also be available for the A350-1000.ULR, that is 165.000 l or about 130 t. If the -1000 has a bigger wing box the volume could be more.
If that amount of fuel is not sufficient we can expect Airbus to just add one or more additional tanks in front or behind the wing box. Perhaps we even see another payload increase.
 
VV
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2016 1:03 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Sun Aug 25, 2019 9:17 pm

Let's see it the simple way.

There is absolutely no mean the total volume available for fuel in the wing on the A350-1000 can be bigger than that of the A350-900. It is just physics. Both aircraft have the same wing planform.

Anyone who dares to say something otherwise is absolutely wrong.

Airbus might opt to use different usable fuel for A350-1000 and A350-900 in their manuals, but it has nothing to do with the size of the wingbox because in reality the total (inner) volume in the A350-900's wingbox is LARGER than the of teh A350-1000 because the skin (and spar) gauge is likely to be higher on the A350-1000.

What the heck?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17477
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Mon Aug 26, 2019 6:57 am

VV wrote:
Let's see it the simple way.

There is absolutely no mean the total volume available for fuel in the wing on the A350-1000 can be bigger than that of the A350-900. It is just physics. Both aircraft have the same wing planform.

Anyone who dares to say something otherwise is absolutely wrong.


Please explain how they can have the same wing planform when the -1000’s wing is 22sqm larger in area but with the same span.

What the heck, indeed.
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
dare100em
Posts: 275
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

Re: Qantas plans 3 Project Sunrise research flights in Q4 2019 using 787-9's, final decision on PS by end of 2019

Mon Aug 26, 2019 7:11 am

scbriml wrote:
VV wrote:
Let's see it the simple way.

There is absolutely no mean the total volume available for fuel in the wing on the A350-1000 can be bigger than that of the A350-900. It is just physics. Both aircraft have the same wing planform.

Anyone who dares to say something otherwise is absolutely wrong.


Please explain how they can have the same wing planform when the -1000’s wing is 22sqm larger in area but with the same span.

What the heck, indeed.


It is indeed the same wing from structural point of view. The -1000 wing is twisted with an extended wing trailing edge:

https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1358735

However, the core wing and volume is Identical to the -900 as is the tanking volume.

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