From HeraldNet:

Airbus on Tuesday rolled out the world's largest airliner. A week ago, it announced that it not only sold more airplanes than the Boeing Co. in 2004, it had also built and delivered more planes.

Boeing, on the other hand, missed its goal of selling 200 7E7s in 2004, spent most of last year mired in defense contracting scandals, and last week announced it would shut down its slow-selling 717 program.

Airbus rules the skies. The only question is how long it will hold that crown.

"That's a good question," said Teal Group analyst Richard Aboulafia. "There are reasons to believe that 2005 could see the tide turn for Boeing."

See the rest at http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/05/01/19/100bus_corliss001.cfm

Reactions? Comments? Personally, I agree with the article. The A380 has generated a lot of buzz recently in the media, but will it sell as many planes as the 7E7?

but will it sell as many planes as the 7E7

If, as is likely, the B7e7 isn't a complete and total failure but actually a success, then - obviously - no.

And no-one ever expected it to do so.

Regards,
Frank

he A380 has generated a lot of buzz recently in the media, but will it sell as many planes as the 7E7?

Who would have ever thought that? Of course the market for the B7E7 is larger larger larger.
But which manufacturer builds more aircraft in five years not only depends on the A380 or B7E7.


Regards
Udo

dont bother about the floating. thats due to historical reasons. we love to be historical here. (as we are the old europe   )

i am sure that we will see a repetitive change between A and B on the long perspective. well, who cares? it will show, if the 7E7 will have the power to boost sales. it will show, hoow competitive the 350 will be.

once A and B will cool down their respective bashing, they will probably focus on completly new planes, designs and technologies, as i am sure the technological development within the next 10 years will offer chances we cant even think about today.

LongbowPilot, the only reason the parts for the B7e7 won't be floating around is because it would probably either take to long for them to come in from Japan, or it would be too unreliable...

As for the other production facilities, from which parts for the B7e7 will be delivered: do they even have the possibility of using a direct waterway-link up to Seattle?

Regards,
Frank

there facilities are centrally located,

Seattle? Centrally located?

They don't float thier garbage, i mean parts down the river like Airbus.

No, they send them on trains through redneck USA, where hillbillies use new 737 hulls for target practice.

I mean for real the last time anyone in america floated things down the river was in the early 1800's.

Uh huh. I guess you've never lived in a town on the river. The United States still runs a fair amount of its economy on river transportation, just as much if not more now than in the 1800s.

N

I think boeing has a better chance of pumping out aircraft, there facilities are centrally located,

Yeah, and exactly for that reason Boeing modifies three B747-400 as special fleighters in order to fly around B7E7 parts...  



Regards
Udo

I think boeing has a better chance of pumping out aircraft, there facilities are centrally located, They don't float thier garbage, i mean parts down the river like Airbus. I mean for real the last time anyone in america floated things down the river was in the early 1800's. We float our garbage now more than anything.


As mentioned by BlantantEcho, we in the US are much more futuristic by carrying our 737 fuselages on railcars?

Longbowpilot,

You do realize that many parts of the A380 are transported by air as well. It is just that some parts of it, the fuselage and wings notably, are too big for current modes of air transport that exist. They need to reach the factory somehow, and using barges and boats on rivers and the oceans is a cheap way to take advantage of a resource that is already there. Plus, by reducing the portion of the trip by land, they can do it at night and relieve congestion and avoid spending millions more on new roads and infrastructure. Most of the 7E7 can be carried in the proposed (okayed?) 747 "Guppy" style transports because it is much smaller than the A380. Look at Airbus with other aircraft...they carry wings, fuselage sections, and all kinds of parts for their other aircraft by air.


Leskova,

For the Everett facility, they can transport parts by water quite close to the factory. I think that Mukilteo (which is on Puget Sound or an islet from Puget Sound) is less than 10 miles away. I don't think that there is really a feasible way to get things to Renton though. Quite a bit of stuff arrives by trains.

Iowa744fan, I know about the waterways around Seattle - I was thinking more along the lines of transporting things from Kansas or other facilities (if there are any) further afield... I guess the transports within the Seattle area probably are by rail - would make most sense...

Regards,
Frank

To get back to the topic, how many think that Boeing's 7E7 will allow it to surpass Airbus?

I am not a huge Airbus fan, BUT-
so long as the tide switches now and then, I will be happy. This is supposed to be a free-market system. Granted, we now know that Airbus is forcing A380s on Thai (see other threads) and whatnot, but that's not the point.
Point is, competition is better. Were it not for the A330 and A340, we wouldn't have the 777 and 7E7... at least, not as we know them.
And were it not for the 737-3/4/5, there would be no A320.

SO- so long as they compete and both have periodical triumphs (rather than either of them dwindling like McD-D) I will be satisfied.

Now excuse me, I am going to go book a flight on a Boeing.
 

To get back to the topic, how many think that Boeing's 7E7 will allow it to surpass Airbus?

Only a family of them will. A single red-headed-stepchild would result in disaster (see the 717).

I still think https://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/1808809 Boeing will have a serious problem the next 3/4 years with production lines being closed & no 7e7´s yet rolling of the production line & piles of money spend on development..

At the same time it´s cash time for Airbus, production quickly being increased to over 450 aircraft per year (& not only small ones..).

- the maximizing shareholder value drive (short term profits),
- cutting costs : R&D,
- return on investment requirements of a few years,
- paying out big dividends to shareholders & management
- leaning on the big profitable defense contracts

during the period 1997-2004 is now biting Boeing IMO.

productions lines are drying up (717, 747, 757, 767) & while lots of investments are required. I suspect somehow the US government will step in to "level the playing field" or however they´ll call/ justify it.

I mean for real the last time anyone in america floated things down the river was in the early 1800's. We float our garbage now more than anything.

The solid rocket boosters for the Space Shuttle are sent via barge from New Orleans. In reality the transportation of parts for the A380 is ridiculous. I talked to this French woman over the summer who lives near one of the roads they have to close down when they are moving the parts. She and her friends aren't too happy about it.

Boeing could catch Airbus in 5 years, but that would involve Boeing buying Airbus...hhmmm bit of an MD move there 

But seriously why are people comparing the A380 to the 7E7. They are totally different a/c targeted at totally different market segments. The comparisons should be A380/747 or 7E7/A350.

The 7E7 will do well in the end, its replacing the ageing but much loved 767. Its a revolutionary concept (Mostly electric, All Composite with Bleedless Engines). I think it will be a close contest with 7E7/A350

I think with the 7e7 alone they cannot get the crown back,
BUT: At Airbus most products are at the middle of their lifecycle, while Boeing is cuurrently replacing the 767 and, I hope, in a few years the 737NG, which approach the end of their lifetime, by completely new products. So, they are in similar situation as Airbus was 15 years ago. They can attack the market leader, who also has the largest plane, with new planes incorporating the newest technology.

They need not more than three aircraft families:

-the 737NG and an all new, all composite successor at about 2010-2015
-the 7e7 in the midsize market
-and in the huge market 7e7 stretches up to 75m (as the A346) OR an improved generation 777. This could get a composite and new alloy-diet like the A350 and new engines. Both options at approx. 2015

With this program, I'm sure, they can become market leader again.

A350

The only true insight in the article is:

"There are real concerns that rather than being a giant luxury transporter that brings greater comforts to customers, the A380 might be used as a 'cattle-class' transporter for the masses by airlines struggling to recoup their costs."

IMO, this is inevitable. The only question is whether Airbus can sell substantially more than 250-300 of the beasts to have made their monumental effort worthwhile.

short and sweet from me...

when you see the word "expert" or the word "analyst"


press delete.....

This is history repeating itself. Boeing blew the competition away with the 707 after they all thought (Douglas, Lockheed, and DeHavilend) they had Boeing beat. Low and behold the 707 comes out, and everyone struggles to play catch-up. My friends, Boeing is doing it again, and just like back then, Airbus will have to play catch-up. The A350 is patchwork technology, and the 7E7 is a radical new design for the future. Airbus will wish they never wasted their(sorry the EU's money) on the A380.

"the 737NG and an all new, all composite successor at about 2010-2015" - this is the first thing Boeing should do after 7E7. Don't wait until 737 becomes same "competitive" as 767.

"and in the huge market 7e7 stretches up to 75m (as the A346) OR an improved generation 777" - I think, both. 7E7 family should cover everything from 767 to 772 while '777NG' should rather move to 773/744 market.

And only then - if necessary - a 747 successor. Forget 747Adv, take your time for replacing 737 and enhancing 777, and only then, as it is clear how well 380 does and what the superJumbo market really is (what if the A guys are right, and 700+ pieces can be sold?), build your own. But don't jump to "dethrone" 388/389. Leave the crown to the Europeans for another 30 years - for sure, they deserved it. Rather make 388 capacity "the upper end" - that time you'll definitely have the technology to build a better one - again, if 380 market proves to be large enough.

My friends, Boeing is doing it again, and just like back then, Airbus will have to play catch-up. The A350 is patchwork technology, and the 7E7 is a radical new design for the future. Airbus will wish they never wasted their(sorry the EU's money) on the A380.

You must know it...  
But you forgot one thing: Airbus can waste as much money as they want - they always get what they need, and even more.  


Regards
Udo


Btw, what's so radical new with the B7E7 that justifies a comparison to the B707? There won't be anything that cannot be matched by Airbus.

You must know it...
But you forgot one thing: Airbus can waste as much money as they want - they always get what they need, and even more

If this piece of legisaltion goes, they won't be able too. And it is believed that it will. If not then Boeing will get government assistance for the 7E7 and further development costs will be loaned as the same as the military

http://usinfo.state.gov/ei/Archive/2005/Jan/11-998601.html

The “subsidies standstill” will not apply to current aid programs to Airbus and Boeing, but will prevent European governments from committing subsidies to their new Airbus A350, a competitor to Boeing's planned 7E7 Dreamliner.


So, Mr hot-air ballon  

So, Mr hot-air ballon

Somehow I get the impression you have not smelled the irony in my last reply...  


Regards
Udo

Dear American friends,

let's face it:
Q: 7E7 May Push Boeing Past Airbus In 5 Years?
A: Maybe, maybe not.
The 7E7 has the prob that it's seen and announced as sooo technologically advanced that everybody wants it to perform like a being from another star.

The 7E7 will burn fuel, it will have weight and as long as the phantastic new technology not has rock-solid proven its stability and realibiility there will be sentiments on airlines. Nothing Boeing will not be able to overcome, but the 7E7 will be not a revolution but just another refinement with some new tech. I assume when the final specs are not drafted but flown some of todays super-tech-gizmo-tech-7E7-hype will have flown away, too.

One prob the 7E7 has in terms of marketing is missing commonality - when you're a carrier that in 2009/2010 has an fleet of older 330s it's really a good question if you want to invest the pilot training cost for a completely new model or simply slash costs by moving to the 350. On the other hand the level of commonality between the 777 and the 7E7 has to be waited for. Would be really interesting...

My best guess: The 7E7 will giving Boeing a push, but this push comes too late to get past Airbus.

Just out of curiosity, when was the last time Richard Aboulafia said something positive about Airbus? I can't really remember. It's all objective, if you ask me anyway.
I don't think Aboulafia's word is holy anyway.

/Milan320

Somehow I get the impression you have not smelled the irony in my last reply...
Sorry, I get it now. No harm no foul.

My best guess: The 7E7 will giving Boeing a push, but this push comes too late to get past Airbus.
That's all it is, just a guess. But the figures don't lie.

http://www.businessweek.com/@@nOb2pYQQ0PeTFxkA/magazine/content/04_52/b3914067_mz054.htm

7E7 May Push Boeing Past Airbus In 5 Years

And my ass might grow even bigger by then too. Speculation is a great thing. You're not often called on it especially when you speculate on things that are this far in advance.

Drinking the Koolaid.....it taste good to some folks here, it helps them sleep at night.

And my ass might grow even bigger by then too
Sorry, It already has

The entire US Steel industry (raw material imports) and Grain/Soybean export business relies on river barge transport up and down the Mississippi via NOLA. It is a critical and currently congested and monopolized routing which costs the US consumer and producer alot of money. Suggest you guys do a little homework before putting comments on the board.

The pendulum will swing.

The 777 was a great starting point. The 7e7 is another great starting point.

If B can just make headway with the idea of a 'family', rather than very good, but almost totally unrelated models, the pendulum will be arcing their way again.

That means putting all energy into a sub-767/767/A30/A31 widebody and replacing the 737, and letting go of the 747ADV (which based on B's own 20yr projections, after deducting A38 sales to-date, would be uneconomic).

I mean for real the last time anyone in america floated things down the river was in the early 1800's.

Boeing built their Delta III rocket plant in Decatur, AL (around 1997 or so) precisely because they could float rockets down the Tennessee River (and on their way to the Cape).

. Nothing Boeing will not be able to overcome, but the 7E7 will be not a revolution but just another refinement with some new tech

That's sooooo wrong.... Aircraft will never be built the same way again once the 7E7 is proven, how does that not constitute a revolution? It's the introduction of new technology, not the refinement of old technology.

With this program, I'm sure, they can become market leader again.

We're probably at a point where, without a major shake-up from another manufacture, Boeing and Airbus will probably split the market very closely, probably not swinging more than 60/40 in either direction....

That means putting all energy into a sub-767/767/A30/A31 widebody and replacing the 737, and letting go of the 747ADV (which based on B's own 20yr projections, after deducting A38 sales to-date, would be uneconomic)

In real estate, the three things that matter are: Location, location, location

In aircraft production, the three things that matter are: Timing, timing, timing

Boeing does not want to jump the gun with the 737-X, that market is simply too large to make a blunder in. The 737NG still sells at a very brisk pace, which for now, generates more profit than launching a new product. Until the market demands it, Boeing should not (and will not) launch early and risk being marginalized by an Airbus product that hits the market at the right time.

In the mean time, the 744 line has obviously ground to a halt. This is bad news: the 744 is probably the most profitable commercial product Boeing has ever built. A much more prudent course of action would be to invest in this airframe and return it to a somewhat profitable state, rather than invalidating a profitable airframe like the 737NG too early.

Also, think what this means to Airbus. The 747 was such a huge source of revenue because there were no other aircraft close to its payload until recently. Boeing enjoyed that entire market to themselves, and if they are not careful, Airbus will do just that with the A388. The 747-Adv and A388 will never be capacity matches, but they provide airlines an alternative to the A388... which at least requires Airbus to bargain.

**If** Boeing can find enough orders to recover the RD investment while preventing the A388 from gaining 100% of the 400+ seat market share, that sounds like the making of a successful airplane program...

I think it is quite possible especially when 6 of the top 6 airlines in terms of fleet size all have a large amount of Boeing aircraft in them. I don't know if the 7E7 will be the plane to push Boeing past Airbus, but maybe Boeing's reliable best seller again.

I am assuming the fleet sizes are like this, I may be dated correct me if I am wrong

1. AA
2. UA
3. Delta
4. Northwest
5. British Airways
6. Continental

Two of those airlines have NO Airbuses in them and another one is most likely going to get rid of their A300s in a couple years. As of right now those three airlines cannot afford new aircraft, but give them a few years.

Its almost a given that once AA can afford the 7E7 they will buy it. You might see an early order for about 35 7E7s to replace the A300, then later several more to replace the 767s and maybe some 757s. What about when Stage IV goes into effect? I guess AA could hushkit the MD-80s or will they order more 737NGs? Unless they want to be like Northwest and fly aging aircraft. Some of those MD-80s are getting close to 25 years old.

UA I think will stay with Boeing for widebodies, but stay with Airbus for narrowbodies. I don't see UA switching unless UA suddenly gets really profitable and gets a pro Boeing CEO in to replace the A32X and 733/735 with 737NG or vice versa replaces the rest of the 733/735 with more A32X and starts replacing 767/747/777 with Airbus widebodies. Otherwise I think there will eventually be more A32X to replace the rest of the 737s and maybe 757s and 7E7s to replace the 767s.

Delta, if they last will also have to eventually replace those MD-80s, 757s and 767s. Once again there is a potential big 737NG and 7E7 order down the road there.

Northwest I see leaning more Airbus. I dont even want to start a DC-9 replacement thread, but you can factor the 717 out now and I highly doubt they are going to switch to the 737NG with the large fleet of A32X aircraft (I believe NW is the largest operator of the A32X series)

BA same as UA except BA is in better financial position

Continental- Well Bethune is gone, but I don't see CO making any radical changes to Airbus and they already ordered some 7E7s. I see more 737NGs coming onboard too to replace the last of the older 737s.

HlywdCatft,
I couldn't have put it better myself. Excellent analysis of the U.S. market. I would have to agree that NW isn't a very likely candidate for the 7E7, but I definitely think the others are great candidates. I do question United's loyalty to Boeing, though. I think they will take whatever is cheapest. Only time will tell, I guess!
-LMP

With all the majors annoucing Q4 losses and even Jetblue and Airtrans expecting to post Q4 losses, I'm not sure that you will even see that many companies left. SWA is profitable because of their oil hedging which can only last so long. So, without a sharp reduction in oil prices (not likely with the continued increased demand from China and India), or a consolidation in the US Airlines industry, no one is going to order anything! Everyone keeps on asking their employees to take pay cuts, but the revenue side needs to be addressed. When is someone going to wake up and realize what needs to be done. Is the US government ever going to let an airline go bankrupt and close or merge without having to sell major pieces of themselves? Something has got to give.

Skymileman:

Yes, that explains why UA bought 60-some 777s instead of A330/A340s.

I think it is quite possible especially when 6 of the top 6 airlines in terms of fleet size all have a large amount of Boeing aircraft in them. I don't know if the 7E7 will be the plane to push Boeing past Airbus, but maybe Boeing's reliable best seller again.

I am assuming the fleet sizes are like this, I may be dated correct me if I am wrong

1. AA
2. UA
3. Delta
4. Northwest
5. British Airways
6. Continental


Cough, Cough. Sorry, but UA operates more Airbus aircraf then any other U.S. carrier, and it is a huge amount, and Northwest has a ton too. British Airways also is receiving more delieveries from Airbus, so your hopes are just going to stay that way. This thread is hard to judge because the A380 is completly different then the 7E7, and Airbus already has a something to fight the 7e7. Also, the A350 won't cost nearly as much as the 7e7, so I don't see how Boeing can regain control unless the 7e7 is a mega success. Just my $0.02

"UA operates more Airbus aircraft then any other U.S. carrier" - which has nothing to do with them being / not being a potential 7E7 customer (if they are a potential buyer of anything any soon - but that's a different question). "British Airways also is receiving more deliveries from Airbus" - same for them as for UA. They may go 330/350 in future but this has nothing to do with them "receiving more deliveries from Airbus" today. Don't be surprised by seeing BA 7E7 one day. No comments about AA/DL/CO? Good! Oh, and "A350 won't cost nearly as much as the 7e7" definitely means "A350 won't be nearly as good as the 7e7". Which is hardly what Airbus wants it to be. Unless they want to get a "temporary niche protector". Won't work this way.

Given that Airbus's order backlog is now some 50% higher than Boeing's, I don't see BCA's comeback happening in a mere 5 years, even if the 7E7 is as successful as it hopes. It'll likely take a lot longer than that to pull even with Toulouse, even if they reverse their 6-year old policy of not matching Airbus discounts in order competitions. It's not only about product but also about the way they go about selling it. And in recent years, BCA just hasn't been as effective as Airbus. But, the good news for them is that the 7E7 is the best product to lay their hopes on at this time; the fact that Airbus now wants to jump in with a hurriedly cobbled together A350 proves that. So, if it can straighten out its salesmanship efforts and continue to cut production costs to match Airbus's, there's a silver lining shining through the dark cloud that envelops them now. And as the article speculates, the A350 may be more effective at killing off the A330 line than the 7E7. Still, Boeing has a long road ahead to turn around its somewhat shocking reversal of fortune to Airbus; it won't be done quickly or cheaply. To do that, it must breakaway from some of the Stonecipher & Co. mentality and substantially raise R&D spending on new product development, as well as getting down and dirty with Airbus in the price wars, even if myopic BCA shareholders scream. I reckon it will take them at least 10 to 15 years to regain parity, even if they do everything right.

Given that Airbus's order backlog is now some 50% higher than Boeing's, I don't see BCA's comeback happening in a mere 5 years, even if the 7E7 is as successful as it hopes.

It's not so far-fetched, man. It comes down to whether or not Airbus continues to win a distinct majority of single-aisle sales:

In 2010, Airbus will probably have concluded A300/310 production. The A330 will have been superseded by the A350. Regardless, TLS can produce about 90 A330/340/350s per year. IMO, it would be difficult for Airbus to go beyond that because the B7E7/777 are clearly better performers in the middle-market. (However, anything is possible.) Also, Airbus will be producing about 44 A380s per year by then. So, Airbus may be producing around 135 widebodies per year in 2010.

In 2010, Boeing will probably have concluded B767 production for airline customers (I will leave out the possibility of -300Fs), having been superseded by the B7E7. By then, B7E7 production will have ramped up to 86 per year. Boeing will also be looking to produce around 72 B777s per year. The future of the B747 is clouded, but let's say Boeing can't launch the Adv. In that case, we won't count B747 production. So, Boeing may be producing around 158 widebodies per year in 2010.

So, to beat Airbus, Boeing needs to start selling more B737NGs than Airbus sells A32Xs. It could happen. In 2010, most of the single-aisles being delivered will be ordered 2005-08. Thus, if Boeing can somehow combat Airbus' massive increase in A32X production, then they can get back to the top within five years.

Also, the A350 won't cost nearly as much as the 7e7, so I don't see how Boeing can regain control unless the 7e7 is a mega success.

You're wrong, the A350 wont cost as LITTLE as the 7E7, by as much as 40mil or so more expensive than the 7E7.

Boeing will also be looking to produce around 72 B777s per year.

So who will buy them?

Don't forget the A359 will provide a comparable range & load at considerable lower costs (fuel & purchasing price..)

About the 7e7/350 prices, in general derivatives tend to be cheaper then all new innovative designs.. unless Boeing is reinventing financing..

Don't forget the A359 will provide a comparable range & load at considerable lower costs (fuel & purchasing price..)

The A359 cannot compete against the 777-200LR, 300ER and 300. Want to try again?

About the 7e7/350 prices, in general derivatives tend to be cheaper then all new innovative designs.. unless Boeing is reinventing financing

Why isn't the 737 cheaper than the A320?? It IS a derirative. It is well known that the 7E7 is cheaper than the A350. I believe even Airbus publicly stated its list price, which was over the 7E7

The A359 cannot compete against the 777-200LR, 300ER and 300. Want to try again?

Fully agreed, however 70% of all 777s are 777-200ER's...

Why isn't the 737 cheaper than the A320??

Many materials / parts/ construction methods & processes date back to the fifties & sixties..


It is well known that the 7E7 is cheaper than the A350. I believe even Airbus publicly stated its list price

Question is, do you also firm believe in list prices, especially those published 4/5 years before the first deliveries ?

So who will buy them [the 72 B777s]?

It depends a little on what happens with the B7E7-9 vv a possible stretch and EIS. If Boeing presses ahead with EIS in second-half 2010, then they'll probably be struggling to sell many more B777-200ERs. Especially if the B7E9 ends up being nearly as large as a B772ER.

Either way, by 2010 the B772ER will have seen better days. The bulk of production will probably be B773ERs for airlines looking to replace their B744s and to grow their B772ER markets. (It is also my understanding that shifting the B777 production to a moving line in the adjacent bay at Everett will also allow greater -300 length production. IIRC, currently Boeing is limited on the number of stretched B777s it can assemble at a time.)

Can that support 72 B777s per year? I think it can, but not over a prolonged period of time. However, around that time in 2010 I think it might be doable. The eldest B744s will have turned 20 in 2010. So, the B773ER is likely to have a reasonable run.

The B772LR? The jury is out. However, more data will be known at the end of 2005 as some of the more influential campaigns to sell the airplane will become known, as well as their outcome. We'll also know the outcome of the 747 Adv.

Don't forget the A359 will provide a comparable range & load at considerable lower costs (fuel & purchasing price..)

Sure, but the B7E9 will, too. The B772ER has probably seen its best days.

About the 7e7/350 prices, in general derivatives tend to be cheaper then all new innovative designs.. unless Boeing is reinventing financing..

Airbus has said that they will charge for the A350 the same price as the B7E7 on a per-seat basis. The figures are available online. That is list prices. You'll know as well as I do that Leahy always has something up his sleeve.  

hurriedly cobbled together A350

Don't make the mistake of thinking that the A350 will be anything less than very credible competition for the 7E7.

By then, B7E7 production will have ramped up to 86 per year. Boeing will also be looking to produce around 72 B777s per year.

Are these your numbers, or has Boeing publicly stated this? Where are the orders to justify building 72 777s a year going to come from? Since 1995 (when 777 production just got started), the backlog has declined slowly (by 29) as production has outstripped sales in 6 of 9 years. 2004's production was just 4 higher than 1996's 32 (first full year of production). Highest production rate was 83 in 1999.

Fully agreed, however 70% of all 777s are 777-200ER's
Yes, most of the 777s now are the 777-200/ER series. However, many analysts expect a stretch on the 7E7-9, along with the increase in larger 777 sales, a decrease in -200/ER sales, and a nominal increase for the niche 777-200LR

Many materials / parts/ construction methods & processes date back to the fifties & sixties..
It was a rehtorical...thanx anyway for the answer  

Question is, do you also firm believe in list prices, especially those published 4/5 years before the first deliveries
We both know that Boeing and Airbus have good projections on their aircraft price and ability, and yes, they're all not published. But why would Airbus launch their aircraft with a higher list price? This only hurts the A350 PR, considering 1. It is NOT a new build. 2.It is listed as more expensive, yet have economics comparable to the 7E7. As an answer to your question, yes, i do believe MOST of the list prices. They do change around once in a while, but i dont expect a deviation of more than $10mil unless Airbus really build paper planes  

One thing missing from the debate: the 7E7 will of course have huge R&D costs; that's the risk of going to new (composite) technology. Actually the technology itself is not new, but such a wide application in a commercial airliner is.

Who will fund the costs that airlines will have to assume to service a composite airliner? When a food truck dents a aluminium panel, fixing it is relatively easy and is based on a basic skills set that applies from a lowly Cessna or Piper all the way up to an A380.

So far airlines do have experience with composites, but dealing with relatively small flat panels like control surfaces, or tails that are not as likely to get dinged. What happens when the food truck drives into a 7E7 and cracks a major fuselage section?

My guess is that this is what's scaring off airlines from committing to the 7E7, until they have a better grasp of the implications: the cost of investing in new maintenance technologies to support the "Dream"; the savings from the weight savings will have to be able to ensure a good return on investment for the new technologies mainteance organizations will have to adopt. It was not the same with the A320's new FBW technology involving plug-in computer modules and electronics that could easily be serviced with existing skills, or simply replaced on a plug-and-play basis.

Mike