Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27883
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:07 am

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 49):
GLARE is GLAss REinforced Fibre Metal laminate - layers of metal interspersed with glass fibre and epoxy. The metal adds greater resistance to delamination or propagation of cracks.

CFRP is fully a composite material, it contains no metal layers.

I'm not a materials engineer (and my next statement will make that obvious in either a good way or a bad one), but I've read that one of the advantages to a composite structure (be it in whole or in part) is that it is more fatigue-resistant.

So the composites in GLARE are there to prevent fatugue cracks in the metal from propogating, as they would on a purely Al aircraft. With CFRP, fatigue cracking is less likely since the structure is physically stronger (especially when wound in a direction to resist the most common stress forces).

I know Al-Li is a lighter alloy, but is it's fatigue resistance any better then pure Al?
 
ODwyerPW
Posts: 1624
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 6:30 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:09 am

nobody is leading anybody for 6-8 years. give me a break. let's just stop all intelligent debates on this site and dress up two apes in suits and throw them in the ring. One suit has a big B on it, the other suit has a big A on it. We can put a live web cam on the boxing ring. then all of you can log on and check out the action live. there, your own REAL A vs B slug fest featuring REAL apes.

A & B will both continue to build fine planes and not one of them is going to cede EVERY market to the other. One manufacturer will always have the newer, better fitting aircraft in one distinct market/route segment. More than likey, the other manufacturer will have a superior offering in yet another another distinct market/route segment.

It would be nice if for two weeks everyone could set aside their nationalistic biasis and just appreciate the aircraft!
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3928
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:17 am

Quoting Slz396 (Reply 29):
The title reflects the most vivid wish of the thread starter, hence his slanted interpretation of what the article says.
Since it is a given fact people on this site often limit the discussion only to the quoted paragraphs and do not make use of the entire text available in the link, I take the opportunity to add a different quote from the article, putting the outlook in a somewhat different perspective.



Quoting Slz396 (Reply 32):
Did I say I wanted to invalidate the title of this thread?

Based on your first quote in this reply, it sure seems that you think the thread title did not reflect the conclusions of the article. How else do you describe your use of the word "slanted" and why do you need to put things in a different perspective? The article says what it says and the title reflects that.

If you don't agree with the article, then it seems that the folks at Oxford are the ones you should be complaining about, not the thread starter.

Maybe you should ask Gellman to critique the Oxford study. (Big Smile)
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:21 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 50):
I know Al-Li is a lighter alloy, but is it's fatigue resistance any better then pure Al?

First, remember that there are more than one Al-Li alloy, and that the characteristics of the different alloys can vary pretty much.

I haven't seen any kind of confirmation on what alloy Airbus is using, but I know that the russians and NASA testet the alloy Al-Li 1441, and found out that it was the most promising alloy for use in aircraft. It's lighter, and its fatigue resistance is far better than for regular aluminium. You can read a report about it here:
Open report NASA-2000-7icaa-rkb.pdf

[Edited 2006-05-23 22:35:57]

[Edited 2006-05-23 22:41:47]

[Edited 2006-05-23 22:42:12]
 
WAH64D
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:25 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 48):
I like to believe that Boeing engineers do not think "ramp rash" is something that happens to baggage handlers when they wear cotton instead of wool on hot, humid days. Or that they expect the 787 will be protected by magic spells preventing anything from getting within ten meters of it.

It's not that difficult to manufacture a CFRP panel and run a baggage cart into it. Or take some loading stairs on a rail and bang it into the door frame thousands of times back-to-back. Boeing has probably identified hundreds of potential issues we haven't and has either addressed them or is working on doing so.

Airbus supporters seem to believe that modern Finite Element Analysis routines are so perfect that Airbus' tweaking of them would instantly and painlessly give them back the ~2% they needed to pass the wing-break test. Is it not then reasonable to believe that FEA will help Boeing's engineers either meet their targets or get so close that any short-falls will be correctable without major re-engineering?

If GLARE is such hot-stuff when it comes to fatigue crack resistance and effective at stopping crack propogation, and CFRP looks to be as good or better, then why do people believe 787's will shatter in mid-flight like Comet I's while the A380 will be able to weather anything nature throws at it?


Stitch,

A quality post as always.

I'm under no illusion that Boeing will have checked, re-checked and checked again, all of the forseeable situations in which a composite fuselage could sustain significant but invisible damage.

However, they did exactly the same on the tail assembly of the 737 and on the cargo door latching mechanism of the 742. It is a fact that the B737 alone has been subject to more hull losses and related fatalities than the entire spectrum of Airbus aircraft. The B737 series has had 114 hull losses and 3424 fatalities directly due to those hull loss incidents. The A300 through A340 series aircraft have suffered a total of 23 hull losses and 1459 fatalities due to those hull losses.

With the greatest of respect to both Boeing and Airbus development engineers, you can never get everything right at your first attempt although A seem to fare better than B in this respect.

I think I'll wait for a while after EIS before jumping on a B787.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:27 am

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 54):
The B737 series has had 114 hull losses and 3424 fatalities directly due to those hull loss incidents. The A300 through A340 series aircraft have suffered a total of 23 hull losses and 1459 fatalities due to those hull losses.

Not surprising since there are more 737's flying than Airbus' entire product line.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 11391
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:27 am

Only factual thing I got from the whole article is in the widebody market, Airbus backlog value fell below Boeing's in 1st Qtr 2006 for the first time in 5 years.

The rest of that article I read on this site on a daily basis, just goes to show that idle speculation is not the domain of the average Joe, the educated scholars do the same. Now whose willing to say that they know any more than our current A.Net experts?
 
WAH64D
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:34 am

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 55):
Not surprising since there are more 737's flying than Airbus' entire product line.

Are there 5 times as many flying? I don't think so!

Roughly 5000 B737s have been delivered, compared to approximately 4150 Airbus' of all variants.
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:38 am

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 57):
Roughly 5000 B737s have been delivered, compared to approximately 4150 Airbus' of all variants.

Not only that, but most of the 737s have been flying much longer (in time) than any Airbus. You can't use the statistics in this way. Also, most accidents are caused by human error. Can this be blamed on Boeing?
 
OldAeroGuy
Posts: 3928
Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:48 am

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 54):
It is a fact that the B737 alone has been subject to more hull losses and related fatalities than the entire spectrum of Airbus aircraft. The B737 series has had 114 hull losses and 3424 fatalities directly due to those hull loss incidents.

Why do people resort to this sort of uninformed cheap shot? The answer is probably because they are uninformed.

The accident rate based on flight hours for the 737-200 and the A300 are essentially the same, consistent with the design standard when they were developed. You can draw the same parallel across whole Airbus-Boeing product line.

Design standards for the industry have improved accident rates. An airplane developed in the 1990's (737NG, A330) is safer than one developed in the 1960's (737-200, A300). Airbus airplanes are not safer than Boeing airplanes and vice versa when the same development time period is being considered.

There have been more Boeing hull losses/fatalities because the Boeing fleet operating hour totals are much larger than for the Airbus fleet.

There is no other reason.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:49 am

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 57):
Are there 5 times as many flying? I don't think so!

No, but the 737 has been flying for a lot longer than Airbus' product line.

Your statistics are skewed. I could just as easily say the 737NG has never suffered a hull loss but the 320 has had quite a few with loss of life involved as well. It wouldn't prove anything one way or the other and I certainly wouldn't use that to claim the NG is a safer aircraft than the 320 is. Nor would I use it to indict Airbus' FBW technology, which in fact was the cause of some 320 hull-losses.
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3474
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 6:49 am

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 60):
I could just as easily say the 737NG has never suffered a hull loss

As is so common (and rude) in this forum, I'll pick a nit and ask what happened to the 736 that Air Algerie banged up on landing a while ago? From the pics it looked like the right main went completely through the wing (which can't be good).

Rest assured, I'm just asking. I have no idea for sure.
 
redflyer
Posts: 3920
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 3:30 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 6:55 am

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 61):
I'll pick a nit and ask what happened to the 736 that Air Algerie banged up on landing a while ago?

If it's the one I'm thinking of, it's been returned to flight status already. The WN runway over-run aircraft at MDW was the most heavily damaged NG so far and even that is supposedly going to return to flight status as well.
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3474
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 7:02 am

RedFlyer,


View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Jose Muñoz - Iberian Spotters



This is the one I was thinking of. That's great to hear, if it's true.

I've heard various reports on the WN 73G, all of which say she'll be back flying, but no definitive answer as to when.
 
B707Stu
Posts: 893
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 4:15 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 7:08 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 6):
Of course JAL, Qantas & NWA are blue chip carriers but what about the fact that Boeing reinvented itself in terms of prices & financial conditions. Or the fact that few of the international blue chip carriers ordered the 787.

As to US carriers, you don't see them lining up for the A350... the obvious answer is the horrendous state of their finances. The timing and momentum is moving in Boeing's direction and I think it's fair to say they had the better strategic plan (and marketing plan) with the 7E7/787. I'm an Airbus A320 and A340-600 fan by the way so I'm not skewed. I think that the 787 is upstaging any A350 model to date and will make it tough for Airbus for a few years... but they will respond.
 
airfrnt
Posts: 2184
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 8:03 am

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 2):
"Even with the A380 burden, Airbus unquestionably sees the wisdom of funding a new wide-body family. Yet its parent company, the European Aeronautic Defense and Space Company (EADS), has its own concerns and constraints. Airbus has historically provided most of EADS's profits. However, there is no guarantee that Airbus still enjoys the political clout needed to dictate EADS's spending decisions. EADS is also focused on other issues.

I think that the future for EADS will depend a lot on what happens with Clearstream. If any other executives get fingered at EADS for involvement, it will have reprocussions at EADS that will be similar too, if not greater then, the Boeing scandals. Thoose were linked to a midlevel pentagon analyst. This will continue to be frontpage news.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 6):
If I remember the press were drawing the same conclusion when only Boeing wanted the Sonic Cruiser.

The parrallel is completly valid. In fact, I would argue that the SC debacle was the primary reason Airbus has had the market for the last few years, and will continue for another year or so.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 6):
About the 777 vs 340 legend: everybody avoids to notice that even Boeing spells the end of the 772 & no 777 has been sold this year, A340s have..

That's intellectually dishonest. There have not been any major campaigns so far this year, andn the 777 outsold the 340 by what margin last year?
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27883
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 8:18 am

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 65):
The parrallel is completly valid. In fact, I would argue that the SC debacle was the primary reason Airbus has had the market for the last few years, and will continue for another year or so.

I continue to be surprised why some think the Sonic Cruiser was a "debacle" or a "joke" or a "mistake".

It was a product aimed at a market that really, really wanted it. We all crow about the 787 or A380 being sold out for three years to scores of customers, yet forget that the Sonic Cruiser, if the environment that spawned it has remained steady, might very well have sold out for three years to one customer.

Yes, Boeing was fortunate that the immediate future trended the longer-term future and that a plane with significantly higher operating costs in a significantly lower revenue environment was a recipe for disaster.

If LHR announced in 1999 that they would be adding another runway and doubling it's terminal space, and interest in the A3XX dried up and Airbus decided not to build it, but instead launched an improved A330 and a larger twin to compete with the 777 family, would people call the A3XX a "debacle" or a "joke" or a "mistake"?

And yes, I know many call the A380 just that now, but that's not an argument I care to get into, frankly, and it's not my intention to start that by making the comment. It's just that in the early 2000's, the A380 was wanted by a number of customers, too. However, conditions trended to make the Sonic Cruiser idea obsolete, but not the A380's.

So Boeing cancelling a program that no longer had interest, just as they did the 745, 746, and 74X programs and Airbus the A340-8000 and A345E/A346E, seems to me to be an act of prudence, not stupidity.
 
Aither
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 8:31 am

I think the next single aisle will be more important to know which manufacturer could eventually dominate the other.

I also believe the small twin market could actually shrink. The fuel price will get higher and there will be more environmental constraints. Whatever the small twin is a bit more fuel efficient or not, the real issue is how are we going to fly from point A to point B. Flying thousands of thin long routes with smaller aircraft carrying disproportional weight of fuel all the way to do the distance is not necessarily the best way to go.

[Edited 2006-05-24 01:37:11]
 
trex8
Posts: 5833
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 8:57 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 15):
Given their big financial commitments to finalising and producing the A380, continuing with the A400,

the A400 is a military project, since when did any military project , especially in Europe, depend on OEM funding??? It may tie up Airbus/EADs personnel but not finance, if the various A400 partner nations treasuries don't cough up the money for its development and production they don't get a A400 for their military! IIRC Airbus was "given" the project so the nations involved did not have to reinvent an organization like Panavia or Eurofighter to bring the A400 to reality.
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 9:03 am

Quoting Aither (Reply 67):
also believe the small twin market could actually shrink

It is not shrinking, it is expanding. The average size of the aircraft keeps going down every year for the past 20 years. And, no, small aircraft do not carry "disproportional" amount of fuel on long distances. Such statement is nonsensical. They carry (proportionally) the same mount of fuel as larger aircraft.
 
jseesue
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 5:21 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 9:50 am

No, no, no...Airbus is set to lead Boeing for the next 6 to 8 years.

Even though Airbus hasn't sold one for almost a year, it's quite obvious that the A380 truly is the Future of Air Travel.

And after the sixth incarnation of the "me-too" A350 is announced, Boeing will have no chance.
 
B707Stu
Posts: 893
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2005 4:15 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 10:54 am

Quoting Jseesue (Reply 70):
No, no, no...Airbus is set to lead Boeing for the next 6 to 8 years.

Even though Airbus hasn't sold one for almost a year, it's quite obvious that the A380 truly is the Future of Air Travel.

And after the sixth incarnation of the "me-too" A350 is announced, Boeing will have no chance.

I want some of what you're drinking. A380 as the Future of Air Travel? I think, like Concorde before it, it will be a novelty aircraft, all be it with some more in the majors to 'keep up with the majors' more than anything. Yes, the A380 will have an impact and with how Airbus is flying it everywhere and changing logos every 5 minutes, it will certainly have name recognition and get a lot of oooohs and aaaaahs, much like the Concorde always did. As far as a major money maker and a revolutionary aircraft, say like the B707 or A300, I'm not seeing the signs of it.
 
boeingbus
Posts: 1549
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 12:37 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 10:59 am

Quoting Jseesue (Reply 70):
it's quite obvious that the A380 truly is the Future of Air Travel.

in what way? It's no different than any plan available today. The only obvious detail is that it carries more passengers. That's it.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9320
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:17 am

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 63):
I've heard various reports on the WN 73G, all of which say she'll be back flying, but no definitive answer as to when.

According to some of the WN employees on this site, repairs should be complete by August or September. Much depends on when the NTSB releases the aircraft back to WN, because for the time being, WN can do nothing to the aircraft.

Quoting Jseesue (Reply 70):
No, no, no...Airbus is set to lead Boeing for the next 6 to 8 years.

Even though Airbus hasn't sold one for almost a year, it's quite obvious that the A380 truly is the Future of Air Travel.

Umm... did you ignore the thread? Boeing will pass Airbus by 2007-2008 and hold their lead for some time.

The A380 is irrelevant. Airbus only has a backlog of about 150 aircraft, and according to John Leahy, the program is sold out through 2012. In the mean while Boeing sold nearly 400 widebodies in 2005 alone, all for delivery before 2012. What's there to wonder about?

Quoting Jseesue (Reply 70):
And after the sixth incarnation of the "me-too" A350 is announced, Boeing will have no chance.

And that aircraft will have an EIS no sooner than 2012, which means until then (hark, about 6-8 years!), Boeing will have a near monopoly in the segment as the A330/A340 backlog dwindles.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:30 am

Oh dear, guys...

Jseesue, when you make a joke on here I'd advise putting '(sarcasm)' at both ends of it.  Smile
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9320
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:41 am

Yeah... I recommed following any healthy serving of sarcasm with about a thousand of these guys:

 Yeah sure  Yeah sure  Yeah sure  Yeah sure  Yeah sure  Yeah sure  Yeah sure  Yeah sure

They're really helpful!  Yeah sure
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 12:43 pm

Quoting FlyingHippo (Reply 27):
Like someone mentioned above, the final A350/A370 design will compete with the larger end of twin engine market, (A333, 764, 773ER) and replace some large quads (A345, A346), Airbus still needs a solution for the hundres 757s, 767s, 332s out there that will need to be replaced in the next 5-10 years. A A350-short version might be a bit heavy, but you never know what Airbus might come up with.

Here's my bet.

Airbus will introduce an A335 alongside and separately from the new, all new A350. The A335 will be an A330 with GenX's slapped on, much like the first iteration of the A350. Its EIS will be 2008. The A335 will be sold with structural modifications to make cargo conversion very easy as soon as a new-generation replacement is available, after 2012-13. This will help residual values and come in just in time for a massive wave of MD11-F replacements.

The new, wider A350 will move upmarket to compete with the 773, and the soon-to-follow A320 replacement will also move upmarket to compete with the 783 (in its longest stretch). The bottom end of the A320 market (A318) will be abandoned to Embraer and Bombardier.

End result, circa 2015: three models evenly spanning the entire market.

We'll see in July if I'm right about the first part... but one thing is for sure, Airbus isn't about to sit around and let Boeing run away with the mid-size market for four years. They're going to plug that hole one way or another.

[Edited 2006-05-24 05:45:19]
 
leelaw
Posts: 4517
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 1:24 pm

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 77):
Airbus will introduce an A335 alongside and separately from the new, all new A350. The A335 will be an A330 with GenX's slapped on, much like the first iteration of the A350. Its EIS will be 2008. The A335 will be sold with structural modifications to make cargo conversion very easy as soon as a new-generation replacement is available, after 2012-13. This will help residual values and come in just in time for a massive wave of MD11-F replacements.

How does Airbus get an "A335" (with new engines and structural modifications) to market by 2008, when, apparently, they can't get the A388F (which already has firm orders and a massive development program in place) to market by August 2008 as originally comtemplated?

[Edited 2006-05-24 06:38:30]
 
wjcandee
Posts: 11540
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2000 12:50 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 2:50 pm

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 54):
It is a fact that the B737 alone has been subject to more hull losses and related fatalities than the entire spectrum of Airbus aircraft

Okay, let's review: NASA has long said that fatal accidents in Airline transport operation are so rare and typically have so many "but for" factors that they are not a statistically significant indicator of the "safety" of an airline or an airframe. Period. What investigations of accidents do reveal is procedural or generalized mechanical matters that might be revised to increase "safety" in a very marginal way. But all these sites that talk about the number of fatal accidents of a particular airframe are, given today's engineering and operating standards, pretty meaningless. Certainly, if there were a glaring error in the overall design of any particular airframe that made it inherently unsafe, that might be discovered by statistical analysis. However, most investigations discover either glaring pilot or maintenance error (relatively rare in the US), some localized aspect of the airframe that needs to be corrected, or a series of events, triggered by pilot error, maintenance error, or design, that but for a series of other errors, would not have been fatal (most common). The "rudder hardover" problem on the 737, for example, is arguably a significant design defect (single-rudder with single-"failproof"-actuator) that would have prevented certification today, but which has likely been sufficiently addressed by a combination of engineering changes (which alone probably aren't perfect) and changes in the operating envelope of the aircraft (e.g. approach speeds) and pilot training. Moreover, given that you are talking specifically about the safety of the design of an airframe, yet using statistics that involve all causes of loss (including the aerial bombing of a large portion of one country's entire civil fleet in a war, not to mention pilot error, maintenance error, and more-complex combinations of problems), simply counting up hull losses is so puerile an exercise as to be, frankly, silly.
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 2:55 pm

Quoting WAH64D (Reply 54):
It is a fact that the B737 alone has been subject to more hull losses and related fatalities than the entire spectrum of Airbus aircraft.

such fact is in itself meaningless unless you compare with hours flown which in case of the 737 is really astronomical comparing to other types of aircraft.
 
Aither
Posts: 1318
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:23 pm

Quoting Saturn5 (Reply 69):
It is not shrinking, it is expanding. The average size of the aircraft keeps going down every year for the past 20 years. And, no, small aircraft do not carry "disproportional" amount of fuel on long distances. Such statement is nonsensical. They carry (proportionally) the same mount of fuel as larger aircraft.



Quoting Saturn5 (Reply 69):
It is not shrinking, it is expanding. The average size of the aircraft keeps going down every year for the past 20 years. And, no, small aircraft do not carry "disproportional" amount of fuel on long distances. Such statement is nonsensical. They carry (proportionally) the same mount of fuel as larger aircraft.

Average size is irrelevant. Putting both regional jets and widebody or even taking the fact that no recent aircraft larger than the 747 has been proposed, make any statement on the average aircraft size trend irrelevant.

In addition how valid is the past trend to explain the future ? (especially nowadays)

By "disproportional" i was not meaning for the aircraft itself, but for the overall network of such aircraft. At equivalent technology flying more long haul routes with lower seats per aircraft means to burn more fuel only to make the airplane to fly further. It is -regardless of any commercial issues- more environmentally friendly to use smaller planes flying shorter distances to hubs (therefore burn less fuel to carry the "fuel for range") and then fly on the longer distance a larger airplane. Not taking into account that revenue management on thinner routes is more tough making these routes to have traditionnally lower load factors. What a waste of energy ! and guess what in term of energy soon we will hit a wall... so i would not be surprised to see more international regulations that would favour overall system efficiency.

Again i'm not comparing airplanes individually, but the overall system.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 5:29 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 73):
The A380 is irrelevant. Airbus only has a backlog of about 150 aircraft, and according to John Leahy, the program is sold out through 2012. In the mean while Boeing sold nearly 400 widebodies in 2005 alone

I think the A380s count double and including options total reach 250. The A380 has a few customers that are not considered blue chip, the 787 has a few blue chip carriers. Airtraffic will triple in the next 20 yrs, 800 747 will be replaced, the test program seems to go fine, I wouldn't worry about the A380s future.

On the 330/350/370, a pragmatic approach like WingedMigrator 's is not unlikely IMO.


Funny how common one-liners like:
"748 outsold a380 last years",
"777 outsold a340 last year"
"no A380 sold this year"

etc. etc remain so popular & keep being qouted everywhere

When I introduce funny similar one-liners like:
"A340 outsold 777 this year"
"few blue chips ordered 787"
"still not a single 748i sold"

people get irritated & say this is incomplete, I can do better, half truth etc.

Lighten up boys, don't play with fire if you can't stand the heat

[Edited 2006-05-24 10:48:48]

[Edited 2006-05-24 10:50:03]
 
brendows
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 4:55 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 8:30 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 81):
I think the A380s count double and including options total reach 250.


Exactly, you think alot. Why should the A380 count double, AND include options? Is it just because it's bigger, or just because it's Airbus? Options are counted when they are turned into firm orders, and Airbus has to sell a certain number of A380's to reach break even, not half that number.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 81):

The A380 has a few customers that are not considered blue chip, the 787 has a few blue chip carriers.


Some blue chip airlines have bought the A380 because they need the capacity, smaller airlines don't. When it comes to the 787, wait a few years, until it has been offered as long as the A380, and you'll most likely see that several blue chip customers have ordered it. Anyway, does it even matter that much? Is the number of blue chip customers a way to tell how good an airliner is going to be? No.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 81):
Airtraffic will triple in the next 20 yrs, 800 747 will be replaced, the test program seems to go fine, I wouldn't worry about the A380s future.

Even if air traffic is going triple, it doesn't mean that it will happen between LHR-SIN-SYD, LHR-JFK, and the other major hubs. If traffic from the smaller destinations explode, and one doesn't have to fly through major hubs to get there, the A380 might be in danger of not reaching its projected number of sales.
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 8:32 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 81):
I think the A380s count double and including options total reach 250.

I think thats reaching just a little bit...
 
CV990
Posts: 4224
Joined: Sat May 22, 1999 3:49 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 8:53 pm

Hi!

In my personal opinion what do we have so far is just a few orders ( both 787 and A350 ) compared with the potenciality of this market. I think a good portion of clients is waiting to see what will come out from Airbus. Airbus came out with the A350 to fight the 787, but even getting a good number of orders they were losing to the 787, and probably they got a serious warning from some clients that are willing to buy the A350 but they don't like the plane is right now. So what we saw was Airbus "widding down" and ready to come with something much better that will get the airlines and some of their clients really excited. That's what business is....if we look to the past and many other airliners that were projected one way and in the end they were quite different. I think some people here is really underestimating the potencial Airbus have, and if Airbus is saying they will revamp the A350 is because they know that with this revamping they will get more orders right away!!! And I think that is what is scarring Boeing and Boeing fans!!!!
Regards
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 15043
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 9:22 pm

Quoting Brendows (Reply 82):
Why should the A380 count double, AND include options?

Because they cost double, have double the engines, wheels, seats etc etc..

Remember Airbus outsold Boeing in 2005, BUT .. value, bigger aircraft , A320 etc.. ? http://www.google.nl/search?hl=nl&q=...boeing+but+2005+&btnG=Zoeken&meta=

Everybody was stumbling over each other emphasing absolute numbers aren't everything & size/value matters, so lets be consistent then.

Quoting Brendows (Reply 82):
Even if air traffic is going triple, it doesn't mean that it will happen between LHR-SIN-SYD, LHR-JFK, and the other major hubs. If traffic from the smaller destinations explode,

80% is all traffic is between hubs at this moment. There is no reason to assume everything will decentralize because the 787 hits the market  Wink

[Edited 2006-05-24 14:27:37]
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27883
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 9:40 pm

I also agree it is too early to claim the A380's sales are now hopelessly stalled and the program is doomed. Yes, new Boeing and Airbus planes will offer better CASM and the A380, even in an A380SR or A380D variant, will probably not meet India's and China's internal traffic needs as effectively as a fleet of 787-3s, but if world air travel does expand, and even if world airports expand to meet it, airport expansion is a significantly capital and time-intensive endeavour. Some airports may become "traffic-restricted" before they become "slot-restricted". So even if there is no trouble getting 24 landing and departure slots per day between JFK and FRA, it may not be cost-effective to run a 787 or A350 every hour on the hour.

As for the "A335", I also believe Airbus will re-engine it with GEnx engines and make what changes they can. It will still be at a significant disadvantage to the 787, but hey, Boeing sold 767s after the superior A330 launched. Some airlines will want to stay with Airbus, period, and if an A335 saves them 5% more fuel, that's a benefit. Even if the 787 would save them 15% more fuel, fuel price might not be the largest cost-delta when calculating all the expenses of adding a new type into the fleet.
 
leelaw
Posts: 4517
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 9:52 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 86):
As for the "A335", I also believe Airbus will re-engine it with GEnx engines and make what changes they can. It will still be at a significant disadvantage to the 787, but hey, Boeing sold 767s after the superior A330 launched. Some airlines will want to stay with Airbus, period, and if an A335 saves them 5% more fuel, that's a benefit. Even if the 787 would save them 15% more fuel, fuel price might not be the largest cost-delta when calculating all the expenses of adding a new type into the fleet.

Why would this concept meet any more market acceptance now, than it did in 2004 when it was first floated? Haven't two years essentially been pissed away? When would this derivative enter service?
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 9:53 pm

Quoting Thorben (Reply 10):
Airbus is the best thing EADS has, the rest (space, defense etc.) is rather tiny compared to that. Therefore I don't expect EADS to restrict money that Airbus would need to be competitive.

This is a critical point, I think. Boeing is currently experiencing something of a decline in its defense businesses, but fortunately, it comes at a time when its commercial airliner business is booming.

Boeing seems to have a "fallback" when either of its two major businesses -- commercial airliners and integrated defense systems -- decline, because it seems that the other business can carry it.

During the last ten years, before this recent airliner boom, Boeing did quite well in its defense division, except for its well-known conflict with the U.S. government, including allegations of malfeasance, over its rocket design and 767 tanker programs.

Boeing's current executive management is well-regarded, particularly compared to the one that was in office during the scandals involving Lockheed Martin and the Air Force.

Interestingly, Boeing sold its Rocketdyne division to Pratt & Whitney recently; the sale was completed last year. I still remember the day when Rocketdyne was owned by Rockwell International. Readers may remember that Rocketdyne manufactured, among other things, the Space Shuttle Main Engines ("SSME") and is now responsible for the even more powerful RS-68 engine, recently chosen to replace the SSME for the heavy-lift vehicle planned under NASA's Project Constellation.

I wonder if Airbus has a similar "fallback" mechanism in its defense industries, or that of EADS, which I understand to be one of its owners.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9320
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 9:55 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 81):
Airtraffic will triple in the next 20 yrs, 800 747 will be replaced, the test program seems to go fine, I wouldn't worry about the A380s future.

But how does any of that pretain to the deliveries Airbus will make in the next 6-8 years? Airbus could sell 1,000 A380 this summer, but they can't deliver them before 2012 according to John Leahy.

Therefore, the statement that the A380 will prevent Boeing from passing Airbus on deliveries from 2006-2012 is totally false.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 81):
When I introduce funny similar one-liners like:
"A340 outsold 777 this year"

The only thing funny is your ignorance...

Count a full twelve months back (May 05 to May 06) and the B777 has whipped the A340 to a degree that is embarrasing. Instead, you try to be witty by narrowing your focus down to a trivial and irrelevant period, then go around beating your chest about it.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 81):
"few blue chips ordered 787"

Boeing has: ANA, JAL, Qantas, Northwest, Continental, Air Canada, Air India, Korean Air, and a whole slew of other significant orders.

How many more "blue chips" do you want for a program that has been on offer for only two years? The A350 has been on offer for 18 months and how many "blue chips" does it have?
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3614
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 10:04 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 89):
The only thing funny is your ignorance...

Count a full twelve months back (May 05 to May 06) and the B777 has whipped the A340 to a degree that is embarrasing... bla bla ...

Don't get so angry. It's incredible how sensitive you are.
Keesje made clear it was a "funny one-liner". More of that, it is not ignorant, it is true.
You can calm down, your preferred company is the best of all time in the whole universe.
 
NumberTwelve
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 8:57 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 10:42 pm

Quoting Sebolino (Reply 90):
You can calm down, your preferred company is the best of all time in the whole universe.

Selling more planes than the other, counting wide bodies, narrow boddies, etc - who cares?

For me it's important that Boeing has a competitor since the 70's - B laughed about A at the beginning, but now they can't ignore customers interestes any longer, don't have monopoly and have to find technology for more fuel efficency. That is what counts and that is why Airbus is so important. Also the other way around, if Airbus would have monopoly, this would be sad in the markets too.
 
AerospaceFan
Posts: 6990
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 1:43 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:00 pm

Just a sidenote: I love both Boeing and Airbus; I like Boeing a bit more than Airbus, because I like the "home team", but this doesn't mean that I don't like Airbus. I respect both companies and would be proud to fly on either kind of aircraft, all other things being equal.

I hope that folks -- on either side -- don't fall into the trap of national chauvinism. Healthy competition is one thing, but when it comes down to it, the objective truth is that both companies are great and both turn out great products. There's no need to take unnecessary offense at criticism arising from national pride, as long as one realizes these facts.

If Boeing turns out to out-deliver Airbus for a while, so what? Airbus outsold Boeing slightly last year. Am I offended by that? No. What happens, happens. Let the chips fall where they may.   Smile

[Edited 2006-05-24 16:00:54]
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:10 pm

Quoting Sebolino (Reply 90):
Don't get so angry

And especially dont get so angry when the Dutch make a joke. Preserve the moment. And watch the Spyker driver on the great Peking to Paris re-run on TV. Another Dutchman with a sense of humour.
 
DfwRevolution
Posts: 9320
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 7:31 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:10 pm

Quoting Sebolino (Reply 90):
Don't get so angry. It's incredible how sensitive you are.

I don't get angry, I merely have increasing levels of sarcasm and cynicism that have been honed by years of dealing with Keesje's tomfoolery

Quoting Sebolino (Reply 90):
More of that, it is not ignorant, it is true.

Has the A340 outsold the B777 in the last year? The answer is no. There is no grey area, there is no ambiguity.

In the last 12 months, Boeing has sold 147 B777 of various models. What Airbus has done "this year" is erroneous.
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3614
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:13 pm

Quoting DfwRevolution (Reply 94):
What Airbus has done "this year" is erroneous.

Well, Airbus has done what it has done, nothing less. A fact is a fact.
 
deltadc9
Posts: 2811
Joined: Fri Apr 14, 2006 10:00 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:39 pm

Quoting NumberTwelve (Reply 91):
For me it's important that Boeing has a competitor since the 70's - B laughed about A at the beginning, but now they can't ignore customers interestes any longer, don't have monopoly and have to find technology for more fuel efficency. That is what counts and that is why Airbus is so important. Also the other way around, if Airbus would have monopoly, this would be sad in the markets too.

Boeing has NEVER has anything close to a monopoly. Where does this come from?

Douglass and Lockheed had Boeing by the throat until the 707, and Boeing almost went under around the time Airbus came on the scene, so they were not laughing, they were sweating.

During the 70s Boeing was under pressure form BAE, MD, Lockheed, and others. From then Airbus and MD took a respectable share until MD faltered and got swallowed by Boeing.

Lockheed chose to exit the market after the 1011's cool reception and concentrate on defense business, which they now dominate with Boeing a permanent second in that market. At the first sign of one of the majors going down, expect them to respond. Boeing does.

The low end has had so many competitors all along that Boeing backed off the 100 seat and below market.

Nowhere in this scenario did Boeing ever even come close to a monopoly or have the luxury of not listening to their customers. They may have, for a short time, acted as if they did, but that was at their own peril.

A monopoly can only exist when there is a barrier to entry. There is no barrier for a second manufacturer, never has been. A barrier obviously exists for a third player right now, but that could easily change seeing that historically there have been 3 or more large plane manufacturers and both Airbus and Boeing have huge backlogs.

Lack of sufficient market penetration potential is the key barrier in the specific case of commercial aviation as I see it, and no one manufacturer can cover the entire aviation market, it is simply too big and has been since the 1930's. I am starting to think that unless we see a huge downturn, the potential for a third player is increasing.

I know for a fact that any mention of the word monopoly is pure fantasy.
 
NumberTwelve
Posts: 1393
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 8:57 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Wed May 24, 2006 11:58 pm

Delta, if A wouldn't be, B would have sort of monopoly - no other companies would build planes in that size like B.
So where are the civil planes from Douglas and Lockheed now? Where are the new planes from D and L?
This is why it's important to have competitors like A for B and B for A.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27883
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Thu May 25, 2006 12:42 am

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 87):
Why would this concept meet any more market acceptance now, than it did in 2004 when it was first floated? Haven't two years essentially been pissed away? When would this derivative enter service?

Because if the A350MkV is truly a A343/A346/777-sized family of airliners, then the A330 is the only plane Airbus can offer at the smaller end of the widebody twin market.

Boeing launched the 767-400ER to keep DL and CO "in the family", and they are now candidates for 787s (CO having already bought them) and the newest members of the 777 family (773ER/772LR). Airbus launching a re-engined and perhaps slightly-reprofiled A330 would keep some of their current customers "in the family", as well, and they would be candidates for the A350.

The A350MkIII and A350MkIV were Airbus' attempt to make an A330NG ala what Boeing did with the 737NG. Now, imagine the A320 has been a widebody with 2+3+2 config with 18" seats and even so, weighed the same as a 737NG. It also had 1000nm better range and a better cabin environment.

Boeing's 737NG probably would have secured orders from pure Boeing customers, but I bet Airbus would be enjoying a stronger A320 penetration, probably more like 65/35% to 70/30%. So Boeing might very well have decided to cancel the 737NG program and forge ahead with Y1, which might be a 3+2+3 widebody with better range (thanks to more fuel tankage), larger and newer wings (yes, I know the 737NG has new wings, but consider the advanced a few extra years of research could offer, as well), newer, more powerful engines, and such. The Y1 would not only fight the A320 family (including the A321), it would replace the 757 family and attack Airbus in the A300 and A310s. It might even play in the shallow end of the A332's pool.

Since this plane would be far larger then the 737NG (figure the base model would be 737-900ish capacity), Boeing would have to keep the 734/735 line somehow viable in the face of the clearly superior A320. So Boeing might put on more fuel-efficient engines, try and lighten the OEW even more to support more fuel to allow trans-continental range, and such. The A320 would still be the better plane, and major operators like WN may very well switch, but you could keep airlines like UA (who needed the extra range and grunt the A320 offered over the 734/735) and such with large, entrenched 737 fleets and hope they would wait for the Y1.
 
saturn5
Posts: 308
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 2:49 pm

RE: Boeing Set To Lead Airbus For 6-8 Years

Thu May 25, 2006 12:51 am

Quoting Aither (Reply 80):
At equivalent technology flying more long haul routes with lower seats per aircraft means to burn more fuel only to make the airplane to fly further.

You have no clue what you are talking about.

Quote:

Average size is irrelevant. Putting both regional jets and widebody or even taking the fact that no recent aircraft larger than the 747 has been proposed, make any statement on the average aircraft size trend irrelevant.

In addition how valid is the past trend to explain the future ? (especially nowadays.

It is relevant. The once dominant aircraft over North Atlantic - 747 is not to be seen there - 767 is the "average" size on the route. Experts say that the trend to smaller aircarfat will continue. You can read reputable magazines like AW&ST where you will find many analysis like that. Sorry but you can keep typing whatever you want - I go with what people who do it for a living say, not another a.net 'expert'.

[Edited 2006-05-24 17:58:55]

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