ANCFlyer
Topic Author
Posts: 21391
Joined: Mon Nov 15, 2004 3:51 pm

A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:18 am

Continued from here:
A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again)? (by N1786b May 29 2007 in Civil Aviation)
FOR THOSE THAT FOUGHT FOR IT, FREEDOM HAS A FLAVOR THE PROTECTED WILL NEVER KNOW OR UNDERSTAND
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:28 am

http://www.eads.com/1024/en/pressdb/...20070530_airbus_a350xwb_qatar.html

Quote:
This design, together with centralised maintenance and extended check intervals, will also help to give the Airbus A350XWB attractive maintenance costs.

Let's hope this finally puts to rest all the worries people seem to have about the panel approach and the resulting maintenance costs.  Big grin
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:31 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 1):
Let's hope this finally puts to rest all the worries people seem to have about the panel approach and the resulting maintenance costs

I doubt it! While the A350XWB will undoubtedly have significantly lower maintenance costs than an aluminum fuse, the inevitable comparison with the 787 will continue--and not just on a.net!
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5534
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:40 am

Quoting Lumberton (Reply 2):
Let's hope this finally puts to rest all the worries people seem to have about the panel approach and the resulting maintenance costs

I doubt it! While the A350XWB will undoubtedly have significantly lower maintenance costs than an aluminum fuse, the inevitable comparison with the 787 will continue--and not just on a.net!

 checkmark 
We really will not know for sure until both planes have been flying long enough to have a substantial number of them go through D-checks. But I stand by my statements that the barrel approach is far superior from a maintenance perspective, and that will lead to significantly lower maintenance costs over the life of the airframe and longer life expectancy, and thus considerably higher resale value.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22934
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:44 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 1):
Let's hope this finally puts to rest all the worries people seem to have about the panel approach and the resulting maintenance costs.

Sure, one sentence in an EADS press release settles it once and for all!  biggrin 
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26773
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:46 am

Quote:
Quoting Poitin:
Second, I seriously doubt that Boeing is selling the 787's for anything like a 40% discount. Perhaps the 747-8i, but not the 737 and certainly not the 787 where people are lining up to order. Now, if you have a source saying that the average discount for the 787 is 40%, please let us have it.

AVITAS 787 Order Estimated Discounts for 2007:

CO - 37%
ALFACO - 33% (includes 738 discounts)
VS - 36%
AC - 31%
S7 - 38%
30 frame UFO - 33%

Boeing's Q1 Total (all planes) - 38%
Airbus' Q1 Total (all planes) - 44%
 
jdevora
Posts: 225
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2006 4:41 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:38 am

Quoting SEPilot ,reply=243 earlier thread:


Quoting CygnusChicago (Reply 230):
1) What is the cost of building a 787?
2) What is the cost of build an A350?

I don't have figures, but there is substantial labor required for joining the panels on the A350 that won't be required on the 787.

I don't have figures either, but IIRC from the discussions we had when the "clam shells" approach was announced, the difference isn't going to be so big because the shells are longer than the barrels, just 12 (3x4) for build the whole plane.

Take a look at the page 6 of A350 XWB

Cheers
JD
 
WingedMigrator
Posts: 1771
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 9:45 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt

Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:51 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 3):
I stand by my statements that the barrel approach is far superior from a maintenance perspective, and that will lead to significantly lower maintenance costs over the life of the airframe and longer life expectancy, and thus considerably higher resale value.

While you're free to believe whatever you want to believe, I don't see how you have substantiated your point of view, namely phrases such as "far superior", "significantly lower" and "considerably higher". It ain't quite so black and white. The panel approach will have, what, maybe 20% more fasteners than this?

Big version: Width: 647 Height: 480 File size: 109kb


Or this?

Big version: Width: 497 Height: 231 File size: 33kb


I just don't see any evidence to support your contention that this constitutes such a stark difference. If you imagine a spectrum ranging from the 787 barrel approach (0%) to old-fashioned fastener-intensive aluminum construction (100%), I would estimate the A350 panel construction method will rate somewhere near the 10% mark. Remember these panels are big, and the stringers are baked in. With all this focus on the fuselage, you appear to forget that roughly half of the composites content is in the wing, where the construction methods are somewhat less revoluationary. I would expect that's where most of the fasteners are found.
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:53 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 3):
We really will not know for sure until both planes have been flying long enough to have a substantial number of them go through D-checks. But I stand by my statements that the barrel approach is far superior from a maintenance perspective, and that will lead to significantly lower maintenance costs over the life of the airframe and longer life expectancy, and thus considerably higher resale value.

One can probably get a pretty good idea of the cost by just comparing the maintenance intervals. If the A350 doesn't need to have a heavy "D" check until 12 years of service, and the 787 needs to have its heavy after 9, one could assume that one of the airplanes will cost less to maintain and be available (flying) for revenue service more days throughout its life. We can also reverse and say the 787 is 12 years and so on....

Having aluminum frames doesn't help with corrosion nor fatigue, which drive a lot of the required inspections in a heavy check.

Cheers
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5534
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:06 am

Quoting Jdevora (Reply 6):
I don't have figures either, but IIRC from the discussions we had when the "clam shells" approach was announced, the difference isn't going to be so big because the shells are longer than the barrels, just 12 (3x4) for build the whole plane.

I believe the number of barrel joints remains the same-the A350 cockpit section is separate, while on the 787 it is part of the first major fuselage barrel. The advantage still stays with the 787.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:23 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
I believe the number of barrel joints remains the same-the A350 cockpit section is separate, while on the 787 it is part of the first major fuselage barrel. The advantage still stays with the 787.

This

http://flightblogger.blogspot.com/20...re-in-world-is-787-dreamliner.html

lists four barrels for the 787 plus cockpit and tail.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5534
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:36 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 10):
lists four barrels for the 787 plus cockpit and tail.

You are right; my memory deceived me. But still, joints between barrels will have less stress than the joints between the panels, however (because of the lack of hoop stress on the joint), and the aluminum frame is still a major drawback from a maintenance standpoint.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
TeamAmerica
Posts: 1540
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:39 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 1):
Let's hope this finally puts to rest all the worries people seem to have about the panel approach and the resulting maintenance costs.

Methinks you were wise to append a smiley. QR pledged to buy the original A350, so their purchase of the improved XWB doesn't mean much in validating the XWB per se.

Quoting Jdevora (Reply 6):
I don't have figures either, but IIRC from the discussions we had when the "clam shells" approach was announced, the difference isn't going to be so big because the shells are longer than the barrels, just 12 (3x4) for build the whole plane.



Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 7):
If you imagine a spectrum ranging from the 787 barrel approach (0%) to old-fashioned fastener-intensive aluminum construction (100%), I would estimate the A350 panel construction method will rate somewhere near the 10% mark.

I question whether it is the clamshell vs. barrels that is the issue concerning the airlines. It may have much more to do with the aluminum frames on the A350 vs. composite frames on the B787.

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 8):
Having aluminum frames doesn't help with corrosion nor fatigue, which drive a lot of the required inspections in a heavy check.

 checkmark 
Exactly so. So why is Airbus doing this? Is it due to the electrical conductivity issues that bedeviled Boeing? scratchchin 
Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:03 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
Boeing's Q1 Total (all planes) - 38%
Airbus' Q1 Total (all planes) - 44%

Compounding the pain that 6% spread represents are the exchange rate woes--even if they're partially hedged.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
cygnuschicago
Posts: 518
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:34 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:06 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 9):
I believe the number of barrel joints remains the same-the A350 cockpit section is separate, while on the 787 it is part of the first major fuselage barrel. The advantage still stays with the 787.

But what is the lifetime cost difference:
- How much cheaper is a 789 to manufacture than an A358 in %?
- How much cheaper is a 789 to maintain over 20 years than an A358 in %?
- How much higher will the residual value of a 789 be than an A358 in %?
If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:15 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 1):
Quote:
This design, together with centralised maintenance and extended check intervals, will also help to give the Airbus A350XWB attractive maintenance costs.

Let's hope this finally puts to rest all the worries people seem to have about the panel approach and the resulting maintenance costs. Big grin



Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
AVITAS 787 Order Estimated Discounts for 2007:

Reference? And where is the average 40% when the highest is 38%?
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt

Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:30 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
Quote:
Quoting Poitin:
Second, I seriously doubt that Boeing is selling the 787's for anything like a 40% discount. Perhaps the 747-8i, but not the 737 and certainly not the 787 where people are lining up to order. Now, if you have a source saying that the average discount for the 787 is 40%, please let us have it.

AVITAS 787 Order Estimated Discounts for 2007:

CO - 37%
ALFACO - 33% (includes 738 discounts)
VS - 36%
AC - 31%
S7 - 38%
30 frame UFO - 33%

Boeing's Q1 Total (all planes) - 38%
Airbus' Q1 Total (all planes) - 44%

Spent a little time on this and the 2005 numbers I have are dramatically different and lower.

http://www.leeham.net/filelib/Excess_Baggage_AB_Boeing_pricing.pdf

The PDF is by Scott Hamilton and dated 16, Februrary 2006, so it is about a year old. It presents both the Teal group and Airline Monitor estimates. Since there is an actual chart I can read, I put a bit more faith in his numbers than in the AVITAS blank page.

Please note that the 350 numbers are not for the 350 XWB but the earlier version.

I have looked over the AVITAS site and have not found your data in a open area. Perhaps I missed it. If so please give the URL
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 4:35 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 15):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
AVITAS 787 Order Estimated Discounts for 2007:

Reference? And where is the average 40% when the highest is 38%?

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
AVITAS 787 Order Estimated Discounts for 2007:

CO - 37%
ALFACO - 33% (includes 738 discounts)
VS - 36%
AC - 31%
S7 - 38%
30 frame UFO - 33%

Amazing how AC, who had the largest order of the bunch (777s, 787s, options....), received the smallest discount, whilst the airline with the least potential for future business received the largest.

Cheers
 
ikramerica
Posts: 15059
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:07 am

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 17):
Amazing how AC, who had the largest order of the bunch (777s, 787s, options....), received the smallest discount, whilst the airline with the least potential for future business received the largest.

That's if you believe the numbers are accurate. I don't believe the S7 number unless there's something else to back it up...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18487
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:20 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 5):
S7 - 38%



Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 17):
Amazing how AC, who had the largest order of the bunch (777s, 787s, options....), received the smallest discount, whilst the airline with the least potential for future business received the largest.



Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 18):
I don't believe the S7 number unless there's something else to back it up...

See the original S7 order thread: S7 Order 15 Boeing 787s Option 10 More (by PanAm_DC10 May 29 2007 in Civil Aviation)

Of particular interest to you, reply #49.

Quote:
Chicago-based Boeing is treating S7 as a launch customer in Russia and is offering a discount, said Dailey, the company's commercial airplanes vice president of sales for Europe, Russia and Central Asia.

The S7 order was viewed as a very strategic one that Boeing wanted to win. You don't think only Airbus does this sort of thing, do you? wink 
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.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8886
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:27 am

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 17):
Amazing how AC, who had the largest order of the bunch (777s, 787s, options....), received the smallest discount, whilst the airline with the least potential for future business received the largest.

Only in the case of S7 could Boeing have been competing against Russian manufacturers.
 
User avatar
Devilfish
Posts: 6719
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:52 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:10 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 1):
Let's hope this finally puts to rest all the worries people seem to have about the panel approach and the resulting maintenance costs.

Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...all-composite-barrel-for-a350.html
"Everyone is entitled to my opinion." - Garfield
 
Wsp
Posts: 356
Joined: Sun May 06, 2007 7:43 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:14 am

Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 21):
Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.....

Not sure what you mean ?
 
blackknight
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 4:40 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:27 am

Quoting Wsp (Reply 22):
Straight from the horse's mouth, so to speak.....

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles....html

Sounds so good to be true sign me up for a few. I can not loose with those promises, wait who was the author? Oh and where are the maintenance promises? Also if I need to replace a 767 or A330 due to a weak route (250 passengers on a short haul /long haul route) will you pay me the difference? I'll take 80.
BK
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26773
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:22 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 16):
I have looked over the AVITAS site and have not found your data in a open area. Perhaps I missed it. If so please give the URL.

It is not available in the open area. You need to subscribe to get everything, though the Seattle Times does make it a practice to quote the AVITAS data for Boeing orders. Here is the archive page with the Q1 figures:

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsourc...oeing07&date=20070406&query=AVITAS

The rest of the orders can be referenced via a search. As I get the paper every morning, I just copy them down into an excel spreadsheet for data-tracking purposes, along with the various other subscription-based aircraft valuation periodicals I have access to.
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:08 am

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 18):
That's if you believe the numbers arernaccurate. I don't believe the S7 number unless there's something elsernto back it up...

That was kind of my point......

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 19):
ThernS7 order was viewed as a very strategic one that Boeing wanted to win.rnYou don't think only Airbus does this sort of thing, do you? winkrn

You could add another 10 percent to all the discounts and it wouldn't matter. I "personally" don't believe that at the time of both orders AC vs S7 that the S7 order could come close to being as strategic as the AC order, which I also believe was one of the first (after NW?) to swap their future mid size widebodies to Boeing...................

Cheers
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2727
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:26 am

The S7 number might make more sense for a few reasons. The actual % for 787 vs 737 might be far different but lost in the overall contract. I would also suspect that the % discount for 789 right now is a bit higher than 788 given they are close to the same cost to build, but with a meaningfull difference in list price. One more final thought. Discounts on immediate slots may be minimal, but S7 might have taken slots in the 2013-14 range or later for most of their frames given them a higher avg discount than one that took as many as Boeing would give them, as soon as Boeing would give them.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:29 am

DayFlyer, just before the earlier threadwas locked you asked about Ithe state of play on 'launch aid' - "I know that they had intented to seek the launch aid. Has it been formally rejected? I had not heard so."

The issues (the US case against Airbus and the EU case against Boeing) are still sub judice at the World Trade Organisation. The current timetable is as follows:-

"The WTO is due to issue its final report on the U.S. case against Airbus on Oct. 31 and the EU case against Boeing in April 2008, but the timetable may slip due to the complexity of the cases.

"EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has said the standoff could take ''years to resolve.''


http://www.manufacturing.net/article.aspx?id=137360&menuid=298

Seems to boil down to no 'launch aid' for the A350 for quite some time, if ever.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
aminobwana
Posts: 923
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:32 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:09 pm

1) In part 1 of this thread, shortly before it was frozen, I had asked opinions on 4 questions:

Quote:
A) Fundamental !!
Is the opinion stated by many knowledgeable Forum members and loudly voiced by Tim Clark ---that monolithic composite barrels is a superior technology referred to alu-composite panels riveted together and is expected to constitute the future for at least the commercial aircrafts --
enough supported ???

B) If the answer to A) is not a complete YES, can it be said that this is at least is the opinion of ER, SQ and Qantas??

C) If yes, will these airlines order the A350 if its remains with panels ???

D) How will this influence the decision of the major airlines as BA, LH, SU, USAir, etc.

I got already a comprehensive answer to A) by SEPILOT. Thank you !! I would appreciate further reasoned opinions !

2) As for the statement that the disadvantage of the panel construction versus monolithic barrel could eventually be compensated by a lower mark up and therefore a lower offering to the airline, this may be applicable for a given business case. But I assume that we can state that if AB goes with panels at the A350, they will do the same with future projects, especially the A320 successor, whilst Boeing will ue monolithic bsrrels in thr future, especially for Y1.
This means that by chosing panels for the A350, AB has put itself in disadvange in the future !

3) As for the statement that the "rumor" quoted by ATW was false, this is most probably not so. Many say that the technical management was 100% for barrels, but this was reversed in the last moment by the marketing Deptm and other decision makers (in EADS/AIRBUS are many!!) , by reason of the increase development cost and time.

regards

aminobwana
 
astuteman
Posts: 7086
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 1:14 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 3):
But I stand by my statements that the barrel approach is far superior from a maintenance perspective, and that will lead to significantly lower maintenance costs over the life of the airframe and longer life expectancy, and thus considerably higher resale value.

Like WingedMigrator, I have a bit of an issue with "far superior" and "significantly lower".....

Quoting WingedMigrator (Reply 7):
With all this focus on the fuselage, you appear to forget that roughly half of the composites content is in the wing, where the construction methods are somewhat less revoluationary. I would expect that's where most of the fasteners are found

The impact on manufacturing cost of panels vs. barrels must be miniscule in the grand scheme of things. By my calculation, the labour content of the fuselage structure (the entire fuselage structure, including decks, bulkheads, frames, nosecone, tailcone, gear wells, fuel tanks etc.etc) can't be more than 8% of the total aircraft cost, and that's on a traditional build.
Just what proportion of the total build cost is 4 seams ?
Sub- 1%?

Likewise on maintenance, I can't imagine that Airbus are unversed in the ways of how to make these discrete seams low-maintenance.
My own experience would lead me to believe that having a maintenance-specific issue that is geographically restricted to a very tiny portion of the airframe, would make it very easy to engineer specific solutions to those maintenance issues for those discrete areas.
Sure, if you've got seams absolutely covering the airframe like a bad case of varicose veins, things might be a little different.
What percentage of the overall maintenance bill is the maintenance of those 4 seams going to be?

It still doesn't change my preference for barrels BTW.
I can see in my own mind how airbus can still make the -XWB competitve using the panel approach.
IMO barrels would have just made it even better.

The -XWB will still sell like hot cakes anyway, because it's too good not to.

(By my calculations, the A350XWB-1000 will be the only -XWB to have a higher fuel burn than the A330-200 (recognised as a fine aircraft), and then by only 1%-2%, despite offering a 70% increase in available seat-miles.....)

Regards

Regards
 
dank
Posts: 935
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 11:35 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 2:30 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 29):
The impact on manufacturing cost of panels vs. barrels must be miniscule in the grand scheme of things. By my calculation, the labour content of the fuselage structure (the entire fuselage structure, including decks, bulkheads, frames, nosecone, tailcone, gear wells, fuel tanks etc.etc) can't be more than 8% of the total aircraft cost, and that's on a traditional build.
Just what proportion of the total build cost is 4 seams ?
Sub- 1%?

Likewise on maintenance, I can't imagine that Airbus are unversed in the ways of how to make these discrete seams low-maintenance.
My own experience would lead me to believe that having a maintenance-specific issue that is geographically restricted to a very tiny portion of the airframe, would make it very easy to engineer specific solutions to those maintenance issues for those discrete areas.
Sure, if you've got seams absolutely covering the airframe like a bad case of varicose veins, things might be a little different.
What percentage of the overall maintenance bill is the maintenance of those 4 seams going to be?

It still doesn't change my preference for barrels BTW.
I can see in my own mind how airbus can still make the -XWB competitve using the panel approach.
IMO barrels would have just made it even better.

The -XWB will still sell like hot cakes anyway, because it's too good not to.

(By my calculations, the A350XWB-1000 will be the only -XWB to have a higher fuel burn than the A330-200 (recognised as a fine aircraft), and then by only 1%-2%, despite offering a 70% increase in available seat-miles.....)

I have to agree. I think that it is easy to blow the benefits of the barrel vs. panels a bit out of proportion. A full composite barrel would be better, obviously, but they have to do what best balances cost, time to delivery, how these will affect sales, etc.

cheers.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:36 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 29):
By my calculation, the labour content of the fuselage structure (the entire fuselage structure, including decks, bulkheads, frames, nosecone, tailcone, gear wells, fuel tanks etc.etc) can't be more than 8% of the total aircraft cost, and that's on a traditional build.

Astuteman, the percentages are ALWAYS small - but the cumulative effect can often be decisive. We've both worked on major projects, you'll know that it's normal to build in tolerances and contingency allowances (on costs, performance, timescale etc. - and revenues in my case) which you tighten up as the project becomes more defined. I organised my own cash flow model to allow 'instant adjustment' of the key variables by percentages either way - 1%-2% was usually tolerable, a variation of more than 5% one way or the other usually made the difference between "We're going to be rich!" and "We're going to lose our shirts!".

Can't help thinking that Airbus (top management anyway) are hoping that the key variables either turn out spot on estimate or work out in their favour. I'm not sure that that's an entirely sensible strategy, considering that it is no exaggeration to say that the whole future of the company rests on the A350XWB selling in numbers. Indeed, I'm not sure that you can call it a 'strategy' at all - there is no fallback position.

Quoting Dank (Reply 30):
they have to do what best balances cost, time to delivery, how these will affect sales, etc.

So far it's difficult to see much 'balance' between the A350 and the 787, Dank. On the basis of list prices the A350 is going to cost a lot more; on time to delivery they are also behind the eight-ball, judging by this James Wallace quote from Leahy -

"Leahy said Airbus has to persuade airlines to wait.

"The key part of our marketing and commercial strategy on this program," he said of the A350 XWB, "is that we have to convince people that it is worth waiting for. If it's not worth waiting for, if there is not a big enough margin over what they would get with the 787, then why wait? You would just go with the 787."


http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/317896_airbus31.html

- and the sales situation so far speaks for itself; Boeing closing on 600 X 787 sales, and also selling a lot of 777s, to a very wide range of airlines; Airbus having sold (even counting Qatar's MOU) less than 100 X A350XWBs, all but two of them to government-controlled airlines.

[Edited 2007-06-01 08:40:18]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
zvezda
Posts: 8886
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 3:45 pm

Quoting Aminobwana (Reply 28):
I assume that we can state that if AB goes with panels at the A350, they will do the same with future projects, especially the A320 successor

I would not make that assumption.
 
User avatar
autothrust
Posts: 1468
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt

Fri Jun 01, 2007 7:06 pm

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 32):
I would not make that assumption.

Couldn't agree more, the A350, A400M Program will help to switch whole Airbus to composite manufacturing and with the A320NG IMO they will do the full change to barrels after gaining enough experience.

They just dont want to risk to much at the A350XWB and be sure to deliver it on time.(can't afford delays on the A350)

Quote:

Airbus UK vice-president of procurement Dave Micklewright adds that the airframer has appointed Deloitte "to help with progress" at Filton as it pursues its plan to outsource risk to the supply chain.

"It is not exactly Boeing but it is radically different," he says. "It's about halfway to Boeing and that is pretty radical for Airbus."

A Question: Airbus will use newest generation AI for the A350 i assume, didn't they claim they have a technology to make AI corrosion resistant, which is in Contact with Composites?

Also the newest AI Alloy,how much lighter then todays AI will it be ?

[Edited 2007-06-01 12:08:05]
Flown on: DC-9, MD-80, Fokker 100, Bae 146 Avro, Boeing 737-300, 737-400, 747-200, 747-300,747-400, 787-9, Airbus A310, A319, A320, A321, A330-200,A330-300, A340-313, A380, Bombardier CSeries 100/300, CRJ700ER/CRJ900, Embraer 190.
 
zvezda
Posts: 8886
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:03 pm

Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 33):
They just dont want to risk to much at the A350XWB and be sure to deliver it on time.(can't afford delays on the A350)

I agree. With the T&Cs the airlines are insisting upon following the WhaleJet fiasco, I expect Airbus are being very conservative about the A350's schedule. They are minimizing program risk and I would not be at all surprised if they were to deliver early.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5534
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 8:44 pm

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 29):
Like WingedMigrator, I have a bit of an issue with "far superior" and "significantly lower".....



Quoting NAV20 (Reply 31):
Astuteman, the percentages are ALWAYS small - but the cumulative effect can often be decisive.

Perhaps I was carried away with my rhetoric, but as NAV20 says, major decisions (such as which airliner to buy) often hinge on very small issues. Here we have two new technology airliners, both of which promise considerable operational savings over previous planes, and one is going farther with the technology and costing considerably less (at least on the basis of list price) than the other, and offers the potential (granted, not proved but expected) of a major maintenance issue being removed (fatigue of the aluminum frames plus fewer joints) AND will be in service at least five years sooner. I do not give credence to John Leahy's claims that the CASM of the A350 will be so much better, because (primarily from reading your posts, Astuteman) that it will depend a great deal on the missions it is used for. Note that we all are faced with similar decisions when buying cars; there are many very similar cars available, and we normally are only in the market for one. It is often very small issues that sway the decision. Here, there is a potentially major issue; the possibility (granted, not yet proven) of essentially unlimited life and reduced expense for major checks which will translate into much better resale value against what? What is the A350 offering (aside from unproven performance claims and 5" wider interior) that the 787 cannot match? If I were buying airliners it would be a no-brainer.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,485374,00.html
It seems that a lot of the airlines are taking the same attitude.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 9:31 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 35):
What is the A350 offering (aside from unproven performance claims and 5" wider interior) that the 787 cannot match?

I think that's the bottom line - no 'unique selling proposition.' The A350 is a 'me too' aeroplane. Airbus keep saying - or hoping - that it will turn out to be 'nearly as good' as the 787. There's a (to my mind, pathetic) paragraph in EADS' press release on the Qatar MOU:-

"With up to 60 per cent of weight-saving using the most advanced materials, in the form of carbon fibre wings and composites, the Airbus A350XWB will be lighter per seat - and hence more economical."

Huh - 'more economical' than what?

"This design, together with centralised maintenance and extended check intervals, will also help to give the Airbus A350XWB attractive maintenance costs."

Again, HOW attractive, compared to the 787? And what a pathetic phrase 'help to give' is. Their PR and marketing people are supposed to be professionals, but that (two verbs where one would do) is a classic amateur's mistake.

http://www.eads.com/1024/en/pressdb/...20070530_airbus_a350xwb_qatar.html

I'm more certain than ever that Airbus' problem is that though they will surely have plenty of talented professionals at lower levels, they have rank amateurs at the top. Who are letting everyone else down.

[Edited 2007-06-01 14:37:26]
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:12 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 27):
"The WTO is due to issue its final report on the U.S. case against Airbus on Oct. 31 and the EU case against Boeing in April 2008, but the timetable may slip due to the complexity of the cases.

"EU Trade Commissioner Peter Mandelson has said the standoff could take ''years to resolve.''

http://www.manufacturing.net/article.aspx?id=137360&menuid=298

Seems to boil down to no 'launch aid' for the A350 for quite some time, if ever.

You're (again) assuming that the loans wouldn't go ahead as long as the case is pending in the WTO, which is incorrect. Look at it this way - is Boeing's military business suspended until the WTO case has been resolved?

Quoting Aminobwana (Reply 28):

3) As for the statement that the "rumor" quoted by ATW was false, this is most probably not so. Many say that the technical management was 100% for barrels, but this was reversed in the last moment by the marketing Deptm and other decision makers (in EADS/AIRBUS are many!!) , by reason of the increase development cost and time.

Do you have a source for this? If so, it would be a hint that the barrels could offer an advantage over the panels.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 36):
I think that's the bottom line - no 'unique selling proposition.' The A350 is a 'me too' aeroplane. Airbus keep saying - or hoping - that it will turn out to be 'nearly as good' as the 787.

As Leahy said, the A350 needs to be better than the B787, not "nearly as good". As their design is of a later date, they have every chance of turning out the superior plane, even if by a small margin.
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5534
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:20 pm

Quoting Joni (Reply 37):
As Leahy said, the A350 needs to be better than the B787, not "nearly as good". As their design is of a later date, they have every chance of turning out the superior plane, even if by a small margin.

The marketplace does not seem to be perceiving it as superior, or even equal. This may change after EIS, but they have a long way to go.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt

Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:30 pm

Quoting Aminobwana (Reply 28):
But I assume that we can state that if AB goes with panels at the A350, they will do the same with future projects, especially the A320 successor, whilst Boeing will ue monolithic bsrrels in thr future, especially for Y1.
This means that by chosing panels for the A350, AB has put itself in disadvange in the future !

..that might not be true...not to mention, say hypothetically the barrel fuselage is better than the panel version (which we can't say with any certainty at all right now), for a plane as small as the A320/B737, the difference will be even more negligible. Most of the efficiencies will come from better engines/SFC's......
"Up the Irons!"
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:32 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 24):
Quoting Poitin (Reply 16):
I have looked over the AVITAS site and have not found your data in a open area. Perhaps I missed it. If so please give the URL.

It is not available in the open area. You need to subscribe to get everything, though the Seattle Times does make it a practice to quote the AVITAS data for Boeing orders. Here is the archive page with the Q1 figures:

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsourc...oeing07&date=20070406&query=AVITAS

The rest of the orders can be referenced via a search. As I get the paper every morning, I just copy them down into an excel spreadsheet for data-tracking purposes, along with the various other subscription-based aircraft valuation periodicals I have access to.

Well, at least I know where you are getting your numbers. However I have a bit of a problem with the Q1 numbers you cite as they are bottom line, with all models and orders lumped together, and it is for only a short period. One quarter does not a year make, and there appear to be several special deals thrown in such as S7, which several members suggest was a "must have" for Boeing. Thus the numbers can be terribly skewed. I would much prefer seeing the year's numbers by product line, much as shown in the PDF I referenced. Unfortunately, I have not found the 2006 numbers.

Thank you for explaining.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:17 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 38):
The marketplace does not seem to be perceiving it as superior, or even equal. This may change after EIS, but they have a long way to go.

This can be difficult to call, since as the A350 has been on and off the drawing board for the past year or so the planes haven't been on the same line. But as you say, after EIS for both planes we'll know better. The late entrant has the benefit of knowing which plane he needs to beat, as we saw with the B737/A320 and A340/777.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:23 pm

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 39):
for a plane as small as the A320/B737, the difference will be even more negligible.

Could very well be the opposite, Jacobin777, if (as is increasingly likely) barrel construction results in the aeroplane being certified for many more cycles than the old-fashioned method of construction, with longer periods between inspections/maintenance. Shorthaul airliners build up cycles (in 'calendar' terms) much quicker than longhaul ones.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5534
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:34 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 42):

Could very well be the opposite, Jacobin777, if (as is increasingly likely) barrel construction results in the aeroplane being certified for many more cycles than the old-fashioned method of construction, with longer periods between inspections/maintenance. Shorthaul airliners build up cycles (in 'calendar' terms) much quicker than longhaul ones.

Excellent point, especially as I see the maintenance issue as being the biggest edge that the 787 has over the A350.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:04 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 42):
Could very well be the opposite, Jacobin777, if (as is increasingly likely) barrel construction results in the aeroplane being certified for many more cycles than the old-fashioned method of construction, with longer periods between inspections/maintenance. Shorthaul airliners build up cycles (in 'calendar' terms) much quicker than longhaul ones.

NAV20....there was a recent thread here comparing the life cycles between many frames, including both the B737 and A32X. The A32X came in at about 1/2 the cycles as the B737 did, yet as has been shown recently, it has had no bearing on sales of the A32X.

While you have a valid point and you very well might be correct, my point had more to do with weight differentiation.  Smile
"Up the Irons!"
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5534
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:16 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 44):
The A32X came in at about 1/2 the cycles as the B737 did, yet as has been shown recently, it has had no bearing on sales of the A32X.

We don't know this; as I understand it the A320 has a slight edge on fuel consumption even over the 737NG; it has wider seats, and pilots seem to like it better, and yet the 737NG is outselling it. Perhaps this is the reason.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:22 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 44):
While you have a valid point and you very well might be correct, my point had more to do with weight differentiation.

Agree entirely, Jacobin777, all of us have hitherto seen the benefits of all-composite construction as being mainly in the area of weight-saving. But things are moving fast; not only have Boeing been making a big thing out of 'less maintenance,' Airbus has begun to react (see the EADS press release I quoted above).

One thing that came up on another thread was that Boeing have already tested the 787 wing to the required 1.5 times safe load, and are now considering whether to go on and break it, or not bother.  Smile I'm quite sure that they'll ALSO be considering pressure-testing the fuselage to a previously unheard-of number of cycles. If they can prove that their new products will last, for the sake of argument, say twice as long as the current crop, that'll be a helluva selling point in terms both of reduced need for replacement AND resale value.

The pattern that seems to be developing is that we can rely on Boeing management never to miss an opportunity to stay ahead of the game, and rely equally on Airbus management never to see what's coming until it's too late. That's my reason for saying earlier that, IMO, not opting for barrel construction was an absurd decision on Airbus' part.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
zvezda
Posts: 8886
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt 2

Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:47 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 45):
as I understand it the A320 has a slight edge on fuel consumption even over the 737NG

Depends on the mission.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26773
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt

Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:56 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 40):
I would much prefer seeing (2006's) numbers by product line, much as shown in the PDF I referenced.

2006 Sale Prices Per AVITAS:

  • A320 Family - $41 million (38% discount)
  • A330 Family - $94 million (43% discount)
  • A340 Family - $123 million (45% discount)
  • A380 Family - No Data
  • B737 Family - $42 million (35% discount)
  • B747 Family - $141 million (40% discount)
  • B767 Family - $82 million (41% discount)
  • B777 Family - $138 million (41% discount)
  • B787 Family - No Data



2006 Valuation Prices Per AVAC
[Note: This is not the sale price, but what a brand-new aircraft would be worth in the marketplace if the owner wanted to immediately flip it upon delivery]

  • A318-100 - $ 29 million (45% discount)
  • A319-100 - $ 38 million (40% discount)
  • A320-200 - $ 46 million (31% discount)
  • A321-200 - $ 52 million (37% discount)
  • A330-200 - $101 million (38% discount)
  • A330-300 - $103 million (44% discount)
  • A340-300 - $116 million (41% discount)
  • A340-500 - $125 million (42% discount)
  • A340-600 - $128 million (45% discount)
  • A380-800 - $187 million (39% discount)
  • B737-700 - $ 39 million (34% discount)
  • B737-800 - $ 49 million (35% discount)
  • B737-900ER - $ 55 million (28% discount)
  • B747-400F - $150 million (36% discount)
  • B747-8 - No Data
  • B747-8F - No Data
  • B767-300ER - $ 72 million (49% discount)
  • B777-200ER - $131 million (35% discount)
  • B777-200LR - $134 million (42% discount)
  • B777-300ER - $145 million (42% discount)
  • B787 Family - No Data


[Edited 2007-06-01 17:58:00]
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: A350XWB - Back To The Drawing Board (again) Pt

Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:59 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 45):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 44):
The A32X came in at about 1/2 the cycles as the B737 did, yet as has been shown recently, it has had no bearing on sales of the A32X.

We don't know this; as I understand it the A320 has a slight edge on fuel consumption even over the 737NG; it has wider seats, and pilots seem to like it better, and yet the 737NG is outselling it. Perhaps this is the reason.

...there are a multitude of reasons as to why a carrier will choose either or...a lot of it depends on financing, current planes in the fleet, availability, m/x, mission profiles, etc.

..I've also heard many pilots prefer the B737NG over the A32X....and while I agree that the A32X has a wider fuselage than the B737NG, I'm not so sure if too pax really know....personally, I prefer EK's 10-across 34' pitch B777 over another carriers 9-across 31' pitch....

..regardless..both are selling mighty fine for a multitude of reasons and maybe you are correct, but I've never heard or read anything regarding life cycle of the A32X...especially considering that by the time it reaches its end-cycle, it will be quite old and in need of a replacement anyway...

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 46):
One thing that came up on another thread was that Boeing have already tested the 787 wing to the required 1.5 times safe load, and are now considering whether to go on and break it, or not bother.  Smile I'm quite sure that they'll ALSO be considering pressure-testing the fuselage to a previously unheard-of number of cycles. If they can prove that their new products will last, for the sake of argument, say twice as long as the current crop, that'll be a helluva selling point in terms both of reduced need for replacement AND resale value.

...I guess for widebodies it might be a bit different, but I expect the A350 to have a longer lifetime also...does it make a difference after a life cycle of "x" number of years (say 30)? Given how technology has been rapidly changing, I'm not so sure.....

I think the bigger issue will be the cost of maintenance...that, along with pricing and availability will probably be the bigger differentiator as to what kind of plane a carrier will purchase/lease....

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 46):

The pattern that seems to be developing is that we can rely on Boeing management never to miss an opportunity to stay ahead of the game, and rely equally on Airbus management never to see what's coming until it's too late. That's my reason for saying earlier that, IMO, not opting for barrel construction was an absurd decision on Airbus' part.

...for now NAV20 you are correct  Smile....but we've seen how quickly things change in just a matter of couple of years....and if the brilliant Airbus engineers believe that there isn't too much of a cost advantage of full composite barrels versus composite panels, I'll give them the benefit of doubt....lets hope they are correct in their analysis...

...I can only hope that the A350 won't be as bad as the A345/A346 scenario is (which I doubt it will)..it will make the A380 fiasco look like child's play...Airbus must get this range of products right.....
"Up the Irons!"

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