User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5535
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:38 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 98):

Is this any different to any longitudinal join on any pressurised plane today?

Not really. The difference is that nobody has found a practical way to make spun aluminum barrels large enough for an aircraft fuselage, so you have no choice. It is a problem, as witnessed by the Aloha 737 that blew its top a number of years ago.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:45 am

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 100):
Not really. The difference is that nobody has found a practical way to make spun aluminum barrels large enough for an aircraft fuselage, so you have no choice. It is a problem, as witnessed by the Aloha 737 that blew its top a number of years ago.

Wasn't the Aloha due to fatigue at the lap joint? I thought CRRP doesn't fatigue like aluminium?

Cheers

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 98):
Is this any different to any longitudinal join on any pressurised plane today?

It should be better.

Cheers
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5535
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:50 am

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 101):

Wasn't the Aloha due to fatigue at the lap joint? I thought CRRP doesn't fatigue like aluminium?

Correct; the issue with the joint on CFRP is not the panel but the fasteners. The point is that if you can eliminate the joint completely you are ahead of the game.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
thebry
Posts: 337
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2006 7:50 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 3:49 am

Quoting Danny (Reply 71):
"ILFC played down differences with Airbus on Wednesday, saying the A350 "is going to be a great airplane."

That was quick  

But what about this part...

"We're going to come to an agreement with Airbus at some point in time," Plueger said, but emphasized "there was no hurry to order a plane that wouldn't be delivered until 2014."

Was there some announcement that the plane is not being delivered in 2013, but now 2014? Or is this the earliest IFLC would get slots due to the large order placed by Qatar?
 
BigSky123
Posts: 133
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 2:33 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 4:32 am

Quoting Thebry (Reply 103):
Or is this the earliest IFLC would get slots due to the large order placed by Qatar?

Answered your own question...
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18515
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 4:33 am

Quoting Thebry (Reply 103):
Was there some announcement that the plane is not being delivered in 2013, but now 2014?

First deliveries to QR are scheduled for 2013, so it's entirely possible that ILFC's slots were not until later.

Quoting Thebry (Reply 103):
but emphasized "there was no hurry to order a plane that wouldn't be delivered until 2014.

Except that Airbus want the orders for the old A350 converted to XWBs or cancelled before the end of the year, so it seems ILFC will have to decide what to do with their existing order in the next six months.
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.
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 5:06 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 16):
You missed my point. What if they turn out to be 25000 cycle aircraft like the A320 is? They have to be scrapped.

Awhile the A320 may have a service life of 25,000 cycles that does not mean that it has to be scraped when it reaches 25,000 cycles. 25,000 cycles is the point were additional maintenance may be required, or the time between maintenance checks may be shortened. There is no magic drop dead date when an aircraft is too old to fly, it all depends on the amount of maintenance one is will to do to keep it flying.
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2727
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 5:34 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 91):
The 787 will have 50% composites and the A350 will have 52% composites

This is one of the places I laugh... The A350 is going to have ALUMINUM FRAMES AND FLOOR BEAMS, yet has more composites? Where is this magic place they found that Boeing didn't that allows them to build nearly the entire internal structure of the plane out of aluminum and yet have a higher composite content.

The Other way to look at it, is Boeing could install 2 or 3 tons of CF balast in one of the cargo compartments and get a massive "improvement" of composite construction.

Quoting EI321 (Reply 91):
Panel approach allows for the optimisation of the panel thickness.

Wow, Its like magic. Airbus makes a claim that panels are the bestest evar and everything a little boy could want and suddenly its like panels are the second comming. Somehow Airbus has ignored or actualy lied about this "difference" in construction in every statements I've read so far. The process Boeing uses is just as capible as what Airbus is claiming thier panels can do in terms of optimizing thickness, yet Airbus has stated flat out on occasion that the barrel approch CAN'T vary the thickness.

It also ignores that they have a hell of alot more joints to "optimize" by making thicker so it can withstand the stress. I'd make a rough guess of an easy 150-200m of extra joints that the 787 doesn't have.
 
astuteman
Posts: 7088
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 5:43 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 82):
Steve is a smarter man, and driving a harder bargain with Airbus because he can.

Ah, this is much nearer the mark IMO...  Smile

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 93):
I have had a number of interchanges with Astuteman on this topic, and while he agrees with my ultimate conclusion he disagrees with how much importance to place on it.

 checkmark  Good summary, SEP.  thumbsup 

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 98):
Is this any different to any longitudinal join on any pressurised plane today?

That sort of dramatics gets up my nose too, Scrimbl. Scaremongering.

Regards
 
pygmalion
Posts: 836
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2006 12:47 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:07 am

The real point is that longitudinal joints require more maintenance and inspections than Circumferential ones do. Period.

A longitudinal joint adds CFRP weight to accomodate the fastener bearing loads and the fastener weight over a no joint (barrel) design. Simple engineering.

All longitudinal joints require extra maintenance and inspection over no joint and longitudinal joints are especially prone to aircraft cycle fatigue. See the AD's and the inspection requirements for any Aluminum aircraft. CFRP makes this better.... but no joint is always better for fatigue than a joint. There is no argument here if you ask an commercial aircraft engineer.

So Airbus is adding weight and cost (maint and Insp) over what the airplane would be for a barrel design. Its simple and there is no argument. Its just fact.

Argue if you like about the manufacturing cost of barrels vs panels... but the above should just be acccepted.
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:17 am

Calm down, Udvar Hazy will get CFRP frames...
 
astuteman
Posts: 7088
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:22 am

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 109):
So Airbus is adding weight and cost (maint and Insp) over what the airplane would be for a barrel design. Its simple and there is no argument. Its just fact.

I certainly won't argue that point.  no 
The question is, though, do the added weight/cost/whatever add up to 1% of the total or 20% of the total?
Or What?
If it's only 1%-2% (or in the region of)

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 109):
Argue if you like about the manufacturing cost of barrels vs panels... but the above should just be acccepted

then this argument becomes far more relevant, as a balancing factor in the overall cost of ownership.

And it's this that I'm personally struggling with.
In a week where aircraft that are 15%-20% less efficient than the A350/787 selling like hot cakes, due to high demand/low supply, does 1% or 2% in weight/maintenance between the A350 and 787 matter all that much?
Other cost deltas could easily have more influence in buying decisions......

Regards
 
iwok
Posts: 979
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:35 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:29 am

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 107):
This is one of the places I laugh... The A350 is going to have ALUMINUM FRAMES AND FLOOR BEAMS, yet has more composites?

I think they sometimes call the Lithium Aluminum a composite, whereas its really an alloy. I am 99% sure that the 52% is a bogus WAG that Loudmouth Leahy (LL) can use to try and bash the 787. "We have the most composites of any aircraft" type of BS.

LL is becoming a liability.

iwok
 
Danny
Posts: 3748
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 3:44 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:30 am

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 109):
So Airbus is adding weight and cost (maint and Insp) over what the airplane would be for a barrel design. Its simple and there is no argument. Its just fact.

It is not a fact just a Boeing claim.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26782
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:31 am

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 105):
Except that Airbus want the orders for the old A350 converted to XWBs or cancelled before the end of the year, so it seems ILFC will have to decide what to do with their existing order in the next six months.

ILFC had a firm order as a launch customer for the original A350. QR had an MoU. Therefore, I would not be surprised to learn that ILFC still holds early delivery slots even with the orders and conversions the new A350 has been racking up this week.
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:33 am

Quoting 474218 (Reply 106):
Awhile the A320 may have a service life of 25,000 cycles that does not mean that it has to be scraped when it reaches 25,000 cycles. 25,000 cycles is the point were additional maintenance may be required, or the time between maintenance checks may be shortened. There is no magic drop dead date when an aircraft is too old to fly, it all depends on the amount of maintenance one is will to do to keep it flying.

The maintenance required is to re-skin the lower surface of the center wing box. That is a show stopper and the reason NWA is scraping their A320s.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 6:36 am

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 110):
Calm down, Udvar Hazy will get CFRP frames...

Over Gallois' dead body -- which may happen.

Quoting Iwok (Reply 112):
I think they sometimes call the Lithium Aluminum a composite, whereas its really an alloy. I am 99% sure that the 52% is a bogus WAG that Loudmouth Leahy (LL) can use to try and bash the 787. "We have the most composites of any aircraft" type of BS.

No, they call that "advanced materials" but they call GLARE composite, which it is, but not CFRP and not all that good.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18515
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:25 am

Quoting Poitin (Reply 115):
That is a show stopper and the reason NWA is scraping their A320s.

How many A320s has NW scrapped?

Quoting Poitin (Reply 116):
Over Gallois' dead body -- which may happen.

Huh? Given the conciliatory noises that ILFC has been making this week, plus the A350 now gaining some traction, I'd be very surprised if ILFC doesn't convert their A350 order to XWBs (and probably order many more in the long run). Airbus shows no sign of the mythical switch to barrels, so, IMHO, ILFC will end up the panelled A350XWBs.

[edit - typed panels instead of barrels. Doh!]

[Edited 2007-06-21 00:33:32]
Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26782
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:28 am

SUV may not be happy, but looks like others in the company are okay with it.  Wink
Ilfc Will Buy A350XWBs (by FCKC Jun 21 2007 in Civil Aviation)
 
Shenzhen
Posts: 1666
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2003 12:11 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 9:05 am

I think that the frame/floor beam issue is "bigger" for ILFC because the time between heavy checks. If the A350 can achieve parity with the 787 (12 years) then they (ILFC) will be able to write a lease for 12 years, like they now can for the 787. This is significant if ILFC can get two (qty 2) long term leases out of the airplane in a 24 year period, vs 16 or so for todays airplanes.

The cost difference in the heavy checks 3 vs 2 on a 8 year cycle vs a 12 is a few million dollars (down time and cost to zero the airframe alone), which can be compensated for with discounts.

Cheers
 
azstagecoach
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:55 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 2:10 pm

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 117):
How many A320s has NW scrapped?

lots at marana, do a search
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 18515
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:44 pm

Quoting Azstagecoach (Reply 120):
lots at marana, do a search

Lots = 4?
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.
 
EI321
Posts: 5048
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 7:59 pm

Quoting SEPilot (Reply 93):
One place that might account for it is that the panels need flanges for the longitudinal joints, which are not needed on the barrels.

How many barrels are they in a 787?

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 110):
Calm down, Udvar Hazy will get CFRP frames...

I not sure he will. That would increase the composite content to, what, 60%?

Quoting Poitin (Reply 115):
Quoting 474218 (Reply 106):
Awhile the A320 may have a service life of 25,000 cycles that does not mean that it has to be scraped when it reaches 25,000 cycles. 25,000 cycles is the point were additional maintenance may be required, or the time between maintenance checks may be shortened. There is no magic drop dead date when an aircraft is too old to fly, it all depends on the amount of maintenance one is will to do to keep it flying.

The maintenance required is to re-skin the lower surface of the center wing box. That is a show stopper and the reason NWA is scraping their A320s.

There is a difference between scrapping and parting out. If parts of an aircraft had reached the end of their usable life, they would not be parted out. Parting out usually happens when the value of an airframe exceeds the value of the separate parts. This usually occurs before a D Check. There was a 1995 built 777 parted out recently for the same reasons as far as I know.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 107):
XT6Wagon

Considering that neither of us actually have the information you are commenting on, all I can say is that its dangerous to assume things. Up until now, the same people assumed that airbus sales, particularly the A350, were not happening. People assumed that NONE of the old A350 customers would convert, and they would all order 787s instead. People assumed that Emirates would cancel their A380s and go with the 748i.
 
Rheinbote
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 9:30 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:26 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 116):
they call that "advanced materials" but they call GLARE composite, which it is, but not CFRP and not all that good.

Actually GLARE, like other fiber metal laminates, isn' bad at all. It's just that the French don't like it - because it was proposed by the Germans (no kidding). As it seems, some French party must have a 'vested inerest' in Al-Li, hence they have been trying to coax it into every A design for at least a decade now...
 
EI321
Posts: 5048
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 8:34 pm

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 123):
Quoting Poitin (Reply 116):
they call that "advanced materials" but they call GLARE composite, which it is, but not CFRP and not all that good.

Actually GLARE, like other fiber metal laminates, isn' bad at all. It's just that the French don't like it - because it was proposed by the Germans (no kidding). As it seems, some French party must have a 'vested inerest' in Al-Li, hence they have been trying to coax it into every A design for at least a decade now...

How does GLARE compare to CFRP, from a point of view of weight?

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 123):
Actually GLARE, like other fiber metal laminates, isn' bad at all. It's just that the French don't like it - because it was proposed by the Germans (no kidding).

In my experience, anything designed or produced in Germany from cars, to electronics, to construction materials is generally of superb quality. Even German construction workers - they are much more through than the Irish ones that I have had experience with.
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:15 pm

Quoting EI321 (Reply 122):
There is a difference between scrapping and parting out.

Once you remove any usable parts the remainder gets scraped. Additionally, there comes a time when there are so many aircraft of a type being parted out that the parts are worth less as parts and worth more as scrap. You don't see them parting out 727's and L-1011's there is just no demand for their parts anymore.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:36 pm

Quoting EI321 (Reply 124):
How does GLARE compare to CFRP, from a point of view of weight?

..it really depends on the "matrix" of the GLARE and CFRP...there isn't one "type" of CFRP used......
"Up the Irons!"
 
Poitin
Posts: 2651
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 6:32 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Thu Jun 21, 2007 11:38 pm

Quoting Rheinbote (Reply 123):
Actually GLARE, like other fiber metal laminates, isn' bad at all. It's just that the French don't like it - because it was proposed by the Germans (no kidding). As it seems, some French party must have a 'vested inerest' in Al-Li, hence they have been trying to coax it into every A design for at least a decade now...

My problem with Glare is that it is a fiberglass Aluminum composite which have two different coefficients of expansion. Park the plane in the sun of some airport like Dubai at 130 degrees F and then fly it at 35,000 feet at -30 degress F and see what happens over time. Also the aluminum inside still fatigues. CFRP is a much better way to go.

Quoting Scbriml (Reply 117):
Quoting Poitin (Reply 115):
That is a show stopper and the reason NWA is scraping their A320s.

How many A320s has NW scrapped?

I don't know the latest count but you might find the following interesting reading
RE: NW A320 N302US Is Toast (by Poitin May 23 2007 in Civil Aviation) RE: Nwa Parking A-320s (by PSU.DTW.SCE May 8 2007 in Civil Aviation)

Quoting Stitch (Reply 118):
SUV may not be happy, but looks like others in the company are okay with it. Wink

Ilfc Will Buy A350XWBs (by FCKC Jun 21 2007 in Civil Aviation)

I am sure SUH is VERY HAPPY now. He obviously got what he wanted, and he is smiling all the way to the bank.
Now so, have ye time fer a pint?
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5535
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Still Not Happy With A350XWB

Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:25 am

Quoting PGNCS (Reply 90):

First and foremost "Airbus engineers" represents a diverse group of thousands, I seriously doubt you will get a unanimous opinion from a group so large on anything. Secondly, if you are so in the know on this issue, let us know your source, please.

There was an article in the Chicago Tribune some time ago that has been posted on this forum several times on other threads that described Boeing's process to get to barrels, and the decision among the engineers involved was unanimous. As to Airbus engineers, I have already posted where I got the information, which I labeled from the beginning as a rumor. But as I said, as an engineer myself I cannot see any competent engineer coming to any other decision; it is just basic principles.

Quoting Danny (Reply 113):

It is not a fact just a Boeing claim.

If a Boeing spokesman states that two plus two equals four then that is just a Boeing claim, I suppose. In this case it is a fundamental engineering principle that anyone with any experience in design will appreciate. Longitudinal joints in a pressure vessel are always going to be a source of concern, and any design that eliminates them is preferable from a design point of view. Circumferal joints have less stress on them and are far preferable. As mentioned many times, all design is a tradeoff and cost and time certainly have to be considered, and that is what management is for. Engineers can easily bankrupt a company if left unchecked; they always want to keep improving things and some solutions are much more elegant but also much more expensive. I speak from firsthand experience here; I have often wanted to go much farther on a design than management would let me, and in fact the end result has always been satisfactory. As I said before I am a purist, and am never satisfied until the design is as good as I think I can make it (until the next week, anyway, when I see something else.) But you have to stop somewhere and say Enough already! We have to build the darn thing!
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler

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