zeke wrote:morrisond wrote:I know they are limited more by MLW or MZFW. I was generalizing and using the wrong term.
Well by some unknown co-incidence you have been using the wrong terms and the wrong numerical values at the same time.morrisond wrote:The 77F's big advantage I assume would be sales price, just like the 777ERSF. 250 77F's sold.
What is this pricing advantage ?
Going by the previous list prices I think they will be very similar, with the A350F then having the lower NPV as it is lighter, lower operating costs, slightly faster trip times, and lower maintenance.
From a manufacturing standpoint, once the 77X is in production is is going to more expensive to produce the 77F as they share very little in terms of structure or systems with the 77X. The A350F will have the same structure and systems as the A350-900/1000.
Sorry I was not aware that you had the precise data from Airbus itself on what the 350F's capabilities are.
Funny - I think months ago you attacked me for suggesting the 777X was basically brand new with all new systems.
They build the 77X and the 77F on the same lines.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/willhorton ... 99f0ad606f
I don't even you really believe that they will sell new A350F's for the same price as end of line 77F's. Well they could but then they would be getting zero return on their investment.
There is a reason the 350 so light - it uses a lot of very expensive materials and due to the way Airbus organizes itself you have to assume Labour costs are a lot higher.
https://www.thenationalnews.com/busines ... r-1.876741
Do you really think there is only a $20 Million difference in transaction price between an A350 and 330NEO?
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/ne ... s?from=mdr
I've suggested before that Airbus may be wise to do what Boeing did to the 787. Remove some of the more expensive parts and substitute in less costly but potentially stronger materials (Stainless for Ti) to improve capability and lower cost while modestly impacting weight.