797charter
Topic Author
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:32 am

Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:07 pm

Hi All!

Accoring to Flight, Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon has made some interesting statements:

"We are looking to Boeing to commit to a -10 aircraft with a longer range but with the same technology as the 787 aircraft", and

"We are looking very, very carefully at the A350," Dixon said during the 787's roll-out in Everett near Seattle last week, adding: "There is no doubt the A350 now is a very, very good aircraft."


I doubt very much that Qantas will buy the A350-10, but interesting statements never the less.




Regards

Steen

[Edited 2007-07-13 13:15:57]
Keep it clear of the propellers
 
kaitak
Posts: 9783
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:17 pm

I agree; it's really a way to pressure Boeing into launching the 787-10.
 
justplanes
Posts: 839
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 2:31 am

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:19 pm

To be honest.... I think that all these guys who are in the market for B787s/A350s are only making statements to help their cause with Airbus and Boeing... ILFC says the A350 is not good yet... Qantas says its good... where it the Emirates guy who normally has comments every week... Personally I would like to hear from someone who knows about these planes but isn't motivated because he's buying them but I'm tired of hearing from customers.

If Dixon likes the A350 now... why did he just order 20 more B787s... its obvious that he wants the -10 and therefore is pushing Boeing by making this statement...
 
797charter
Topic Author
Posts: 154
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:32 am

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:25 pm

Quoting JustPlanes (Reply 2):
If Dixon likes the A350 now... why did he just order 20 more B787s... its obvious that he wants the -10 and therefore is pushing Boeing by making this statement...

I agree.

But Qantas buy of 787's was one of the reasons for Airbus to rethink the A350.
Competition is good!
Keep it clear of the propellers
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13583
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:30 pm

What does he know? Oh wait he ordered a pile of 787's. He knows. But he thinks the A350 is good? Let's dismiss it as PR..

Quoting JustPlanes (Reply 2):
If Dixon likes the A350 now... why did he just order 20 more B787s... its obvious that he wants the -10 and therefore is pushing Boeing by making this statement...

In a.netterish logic; he ordered 787s because the A350XWB was not available yet?  Wink

All Jokes aside I think can be creditted to be launch custoemrs of the 787-9, they demanded & got more range & seats making it a 787-9"ER". which was a valuable improvement to the basic design I guess.
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
Maersk737
Posts: 660
Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:37 am

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:52 pm

Quoting JustPlanes (Reply 2):
Personally I would like to hear from someone who knows about these planes but isn't motivated because he's buying them but I'm tired of hearing from customers.

Who do you want to hear from? If not the costumers, who are actually buying planes ?

Cheers

Peter
I'm not proud to be a Viking, just thankfull
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 22680
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:55 pm

Quoting JustPlanes (Reply 2):
ILFC says the A350 is not good yet...

That's not at all what was said.

From the other thread:

Quoting Flying-Tiger (Thread starter):
'Teams of engineers are still working together to see what else can be changed,' Udvar-Hazy told the newspaper on the sidelines of an event in Seattle, WA, at which Airbus rival Boeing (nyse: BA - news - people )'s 787 model was being presented.

So he's not saying it's a steaming pile of dung, he's saying that there are changes still being made, which is absolutely true at this point in the design phase for any product.

The real question is: is the A350XWB going to be competitive enough with the 787 to make a good ROI for Airbus? At this point, I'm a sceptic. I want to see a nice steady stream of orders rolling in before I'm on the bandwagon, like we see for 787, and unlike the burst of mostly reconfirmed A350 Mk IV orders we have seen for A350XWB. Hopefully this will happen as the next design milestone is reached.
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
 
eatmybologna
Posts: 375
Joined: Sat Apr 30, 2005 3:21 am

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 8:58 pm

Quoting Keesje (Reply 4):
In a.netterish logic; he ordered 787s because the A350XWB was not available yet?

In my opinion, this logic is sound. Boeing provided many customers with the right plane at the right time. Had Airbus been able to coincidentally sell a similarly advanced airframe that was economically, environmentally, ergonomically superior, and one that requires less MX, they could have enjoyed a similar success story akin to the B787.

But then again, the world's skies wouldn't be graced by the A380.
Isn't knowledge more than just the acquisition of information? Shouldn't the acquired information be correct?
 
EI321
Posts: 5028
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:05 pm

Quoting 797charter (Thread starter):
"We are looking very, very carefully at the A350," Dixon said during the 787's roll-out in Everett near Seattle last week, adding: "There is no doubt the A350 now is a very, very good aircraft."

I suspect they are eyeing the A350-1000 as a possible replacement for the 747-400's that wont be replaced by the A380.
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5946
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:08 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 6):
The real question is: is the A350XWB going to be competitive enough with the 787 to make a good ROI for Airbus? At this point, I'm a sceptic.

Consider three points here:

  • Airbus is quoting a development price for the A350 which is 50% higher than the 787.
  • (So far) the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate, and if some customers are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787.
  • Y3 is still a potential stalking horse.

    Does Airbus ever have a chance of getting an RoI comparable to what Boeing gets on the 787?
  • “In the age of information, ignorance is a choice.”
    -Donny Miller
     
    WAH64D
    Posts: 744
    Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:20 pm

    Quoting N328KF (Reply 9):
    Consider three points here:

    # Airbus is quoting a development price for the A350 which is 50% higher than the 787.
    # (So far) the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate, and if some customers are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787.
    # Y3 is still a potential stalking horse.

    Does Airbus ever have a chance of getting an RoI comparable to what Boeing gets on the 787?

    Y3 seems to be much vaunted on a.net, albeit in the main by those with a US flag next to their username. I think its best left alone as there isn't even any vague performance/technology/size/range data available for it. Any reference to it in the context of it being competition to another aircraft is nothing more than complete and utter speculation. I think the A350 order book is very healthy considering the design is not yet frozen and there's 6 years left until EIS.

    Quoting Revelation (Reply 6):
    The real question is: is the A350XWB going to be competitive enough with the 787 to make a good ROI for Airbus? At this point, I'm a sceptic. I want to see a nice steady stream of orders rolling in before I'm on the bandwagon, like we see for 787, and unlike the burst of mostly reconfirmed A350 Mk IV orders we have seen for A350XWB.

    Orders are orders, they are still selling aircraft. I'm 100% certain that over the next 6 years until EIS and beyond, you will see a very steady stream of orders.

    Quoting Kaitak (Reply 1):
    I agree; it's really a way to pressure Boeing into launching the 787-10.

    IMO an announcement for a B787-10 will at the same time see GE producing an engine for the A350-1000 as it will guarantee the potential ROI they seem so hung up on for the development of a suitable engine.
    I AM the No-spotalotacus.
     
    scouseflyer
    Posts: 2192
    Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 7:02 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:23 pm

    Quoting N328KF (Reply 9):
    (So far) the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate, and if some customers are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787.

    Hmm -

    787 launched 26/04/04 - sales 677 in 3.25 years

    XWB launched 01/12/06 - sales 170 in 0.75 years

    Looks about the same to me!

    I'd agree though that the XWB sales need to be sustained over the next 4 years and then they can be compared to the 787.
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 pm

    Quoting EI321 (Reply 8):
    I suspect they are eyeing the A350-1000 as a possible replacement for the 747-400's that wont be replaced by the A380.

     checkmark 

    The A350-1000's claimed efficiency over the 777-300ER kind of makes it the "777-200LR" to the 77W's "777-200ER".

    The biggest advantage the 772LR has over the 772ER is not the extra 2000nm of range. It's the fact it can carry more people and cargo 7500nm then the 772ER can and do it more efficiently.

    If an A350-1000 can carry a 77W's payload close or equal to a 744's range, that is something a 77W can't do itself. Airlines that would like to replace 744s with 77Ws but can't afford the range hit a 77W takes as it approaches MNZFW are no doubt looking at the A350-1000 to see how much farther they can fly.
     
    DAYflyer
    Posts: 3546
    Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:35 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:29 pm

    The A-350 is a good airplane, no doubt about it. If the 787-10 does not get launched soon, Dixon will order the 350 for the bigger sized airframe.

    I think Boeing is really missing the boat by trying to milk a few 777 orders instead of developing the -10. This is the second large customer to say in public they want the -10. What in the hell is Boeing waiting for??  grumpy 
    One Nation Under God
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:30 pm

    Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 11):


    Quoting N328KF in Reply 9:
    (So far) the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate, and if some customers are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787.

    Hmm -

    787 launched 26/04/04 - sales 677 in 3.25 years

    XWB launched 01/12/06 - sales 170 in 0.75 years

    Looks about the same to me!

    Honestly not trying to stir the pot, but if you expand the A350's timeframe to include the time the original version was offered for sale as it did record firm orders which still stand on the books (as they await cancellation or conversion), the picture is not quite so rosy in terms of units sold over time.

    Right now, it's kind of like comparing A350-900 orders from 1/12/06 against 787-10 orders from the week after launch and saying the A350-900 is obviously greatly preferred by airlines (assuming the 787-10 doesn't launch in the hundreds).  Wink
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:33 pm

    Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 13):
    I think Boeing is really missing the boat by trying to milk a few 777 orders instead of developing the -10. This is the second large customer to say in public they want the -10. What in the hell is Boeing waiting for??  grumpy 

    If Dixon wanted a 787-10 that would carry a bit over 300 people 7500nm, he could have it right now.

    But he doesn't. And neither does EK.

    They want 350 people and full cargo at least 8000nm. I'm not sure the A350-1000 will be able to do that (though they did raise the MTOW 11,000lbs recently, so they're trying), but the only way the 787-10 is going to make that is to exceed the current undercarriage's MTOW limit which means a major redesign of the wingbox area and a later EIS.
     
    Maersk737
    Posts: 660
    Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:37 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:36 pm

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
    Honestly not trying to stir the pot, but if you expand the A350's timeframe to include the time the original version was offered for sale as it did record firm orders which still stand on the books (as they await cancellation or conversion), the picture is not quite so rosy in terms of units sold over time.

    Yes if we expand the timeframe you are right   If we don't expand the timeframe, Scouseflyer has a good point  

    Cheers

    Peter

    [Edited 2007-07-13 14:37:32]
    I'm not proud to be a Viking, just thankfull
     
    WAH64D
    Posts: 744
    Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2005 4:14 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:37 pm

    Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 13):
    I think Boeing is really missing the boat by trying to milk a few 777 orders instead of developing the -10. This is the second large customer to say in public they want the -10. What in the hell is Boeing waiting for?? grumpy

    I agree. My bet is that they're trying to wrangle an exclusivity deal with GE to make an RR only powered A350-1000 appear less "competitive".
    I AM the No-spotalotacus.
     
    User avatar
    zeke
    Posts: 14641
    Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:43 pm

    This could always be Geoff signal to indicate that QF mainline will be 787 and JQ 350, or vise versa.
    Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:44 pm

    Quoting WAH64D (Reply 17):
    I agree. My bet is that they're trying to wrangle an exclusivity deal with GE to make an RR only powered A350-1000 appear less "competitive".

    I don't see why Boeing would do that, since it means operators of RR-powered 787-3s, -8s, and -9s would be effectively "frozen out" of the -10, -11 and -HGWS which would just make them all appear "less competitive" to the A350...

    I highly doubt Boeing and GE expect the 777-sized 787s to sell in the low hundreds, so there is no reason for GE to demand exclusivity, nor Boeing to grant it. Frankly, they both got lucky that fuel prices made the A345 and A346 uncompetitive and won them more 777 and GE90-11xB orders and I expect they understand this.

    Since I don't see that happening with the A350 line, I would be surprised (and, frankly, dismayed) if Boeing and GE negotiate an exclusivity deal unless GE picks up most of the tab on developing those HGW and larger 787 models.
     
    User avatar
    Revelation
    Posts: 22680
    Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:55 pm

    Quoting N328KF (Reply 9):
    Does Airbus ever have a chance of getting an RoI comparable to what Boeing gets on the 787?

    Well:
    A) Airbus only needs an ROI that satisfies its internal goals
    B) I think Airbus's ROI on A320 and A330 must be pretty impressive
    C) Boeing has many partners feeding at the trough on the 787 program, so who knows what their ROI really is?

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
    Right now, it's kind of like comparing A350-900 orders from 1/12/06 against 787-10 orders from the week after launch and saying the A350-900 is obviously greatly preferred by airlines (assuming the 787-10 doesn't launch in the hundreds). Wink

    The B787 had a slow period after the initial ANA and JAL orders. I think it's pretty natural to see orders slow until the design is firmed up further and EIS is clearly in sight. But as I said, I'll remain sceptical till I see the orders streaming in.
    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
    keesje
    Posts: 13583
    Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:11 pm

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
    Right now, it's kind of like comparing A350-900 orders from 1/12/06 against 787-10 orders from the week after launch and saying the A350-900 is obviously greatly preferred by airlines (assuming the 787-10 doesn't launch in the hundreds).

    Maybe the stalled launches of the 767-400ERX and Sonic cruiser should be taken into the time line, like Flight Global did.

    I don't know how many 787s were ordered 6 years before EIS (2002). For the A350 it's >100.
    "Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
     
    User avatar
    autothrust
    Posts: 1468
    Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 8:54 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:12 pm

    Quoting N328KF (Reply 9):

    # Airbus is quoting a development price for the A350 which is 50% higher than the 787.
    # (So far) the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate, and if some customers are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787.
    # Y3 is still a potential stalking horse.

    Please help me why the development price for the A350 is 50% higher then the 787...  Yeah sure  Confused
    So far the new version isnt on the market a long time. Other customers arent under the impression thats older technology.

    Y3 is wishful thinking, wont exist before 2015 as Boeing said. They would rather upgrade the 777 or make the 787-10.

    Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 13):
    If the 787-10 does not get launched soon, Dixon will order the 350 for the bigger sized airframe.

    I think Boeing is really missing the boat by trying to milk a few 777 orders instead of developing the -10. This is the second large customer to say in public they want the -10. What in the hell is Boeing waiting for??

    Couldnt agree more. Though one can understand that a potential 787-10 involve some costs. Or maybe they just wait until final freeze of the A350XWB to get the exact specs.
    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.
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:19 pm

    Quoting Zeke (Reply 18):
    This could always be Geoff signal to indicate that QF mainline will be 787 and JQ 350, or vise versa.

    I was under the impression the first batches of 787s are going to JQ to replace their A330s...

    Quoting Keesje (Reply 21):
    I don't know how many 787s were ordered 6 years before EIS (2002). For the A350 it's >100.

    That would be zero, but that is because the time between the 787's program launch / first order and EIS is less then six years.
     
    Maersk737
    Posts: 660
    Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:37 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:27 pm

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 23):
    That would be zero, but that is because the time between the 787's program launch / first order and EIS is less then six years

    You got him Big grin

    Cheers

    Peter
    I'm not proud to be a Viking, just thankfull
     
    bigjku
    Posts: 1906
    Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:27 pm

    Quoting AutoThrust (Reply 22):
    Or maybe they just wait until final freeze of the A350XWB to get the exact specs.

    I think this is exactly what they want to do. Once they see what the A350's can do a decision can be made on where the 787 variants need to be as far as capability.
     
    User avatar
    keesje
    Posts: 13583
    Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:28 pm


    If a Boeing 787-10 gets launched and Dixon needs a 787-10 / A350-900 / B777-200ER sized aircraft he will probably order the 787-10.


    If he needs something bigger, like a B777-300ER / A350-1000 sized aircaft, well, what did he say about the Boeing 777 again?
    "Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
     
    StickShaker
    Posts: 620
    Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2004 7:34 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:38 pm

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 15):
    If Dixon wanted a 787-10 that would carry a bit over 300 people 7500nm, he could have it right now.


    But he doesn't. And neither does EK.

    They want 350 people and full cargo at least 8000nm. I'm not sure the A350-1000 will be able to do that (though they did raise the MTOW 11,000lbs recently, so they're trying), but the only way the 787-10 is going to make that is to exceed the current undercarriage's MTOW limit which means a major redesign of the wingbox area and a later EIS.

     checkmark   checkmark 

    Dixon is clearly telling Boeing that a 787-10 using the existing gross weight of the 789 is not what the market wants and that they should make the extra effort (ie commit to the significantly higher R&D cost) to produce a 787-10ER.
    To do so is a much more complex decision for Boeing as they need to be sure of a sufficient ROI to justify the much larger R&D cost of extending the platform beyond its originally intended design limits. Boeing can certainly develop the aircraft but would not want to do so for only a handful of customers - even if they are blue chip airlines.
    Given the significant amount of structural upgrades to support an increase in gross weight it is interesting to speculate the cost - I dont think Boeing would get much change from 2 to 3 billion dollars. The 345/346 program was costed at $3B when it was launched. Interested to hear what others may think on this one.
    Producing a standard 787-10 is a relatively easy decision - a 787-10ER requires a lot more study before taking the plunge.

    Quoting WAH64D (Reply 10):
    Y3 seems to be much vaunted on a.net, albeit in the main by those with a US flag next to their username. I think its best left alone as there isn't even any vague performance/technology/size/range data available for it. Any reference to it in the context of it being competition to another aircraft is nothing more than complete and utter speculation.

     checkmark 

    Agreed - Y3 is a long way off.



    Cheers,
    StickShaker
     
    columba
    Posts: 5232
    Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 10:53 pm

    Quoting WAH64D (Reply 10):
    Y3 seems to be much vaunted on a.net, albeit in the main by those with a US flag next to their username. I think its best left alone as there isn't even any vague performance/technology/size/range data available for it. Any reference to it in the context of it being competition to another aircraft is nothing more than complete and utter speculation. I think the A350 order book is very healthy considering the design is not yet frozen and there's 6 years left until EIS.

     checkmark 

    Quoting EI321 (Reply 8):
    I suspect they are eyeing the A350-1000 as a possible replacement for the 747-400's that wont be replaced by the A380.

     checkmark 

    Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 13):
    I think Boeing is really missing the boat by trying to milk a few 777 orders instead of developing the -10. This is the second large customer to say in public they want the -10. What in the hell is Boeing waiting for??

    Reminds me a little on the 737 Classic vs. A320.
    The second large customer ? I think it is the third: EK, LH and now QF.
    It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
     
    EI321
    Posts: 5028
    Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:05 pm

    Looks like this could be yet another order for GE to loose.

    Earth to GE - Wakey Wakey!!!
     
    ikramerica
    Posts: 15056
    Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 9:33 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:21 pm

    How many new threads can you make from the SAME COMMENTS from Dixon? Keesje started a couple last week. It's the same comment quoted in a different source.
    Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
     
    aminobwana
    Posts: 923
    Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:32 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:28 pm

    [quote=797charter,reply=0]"We are looking to Boeing to commit to a -10 aircraft with a longer range but with the same technology as the 787 aircraft", and

    Quote:
    "We are looking very, very carefully at the A350," Dixon said during the 787's roll-out in Everett near Seattle last week, adding: "There is no doubt the A350 now is a very, very good aircraft."

    Quote from aminobwana's Reply 68 thread "Customer still pushing for A350XWB redesign"

    Quote:
    The lack of Boeings decision regarding the B7811 (i.e, a direct competitor of the A359 10) is IMHO a serious mistake.Even if the demand for aircrafts of the size of the A359 10 at this moment is not so high (but will so later), and these at the moment are only (not fully completed)paper designs, many airlines needing a lot of B788 and B789 also require a generally much lesser number of larger aircraft and there Boeing for the moment is not competing with a state-of-the-art offering. And as it it comprehensible, the solution to buy the smaller from Boeing and the larger from Airbus is not appealing, leading that for the uniformity sake some of airlines prefer ordering all A350 and the consequent loss of orders by Boeing
    ...............
    Boeing would be able to sell the B773ER for a good while more, but not make the mistake to speculate that Airbus will not come up timely with the A3510 and basing on such WISHFUL THINKING, assume that they could sell it for a few years more by no not implementing the A7811. This would smell as a similar mistake as Airbus made by believing John Leahy that the B787 was not dangerous !!

    Obviously, as several colleagues state, this is an undisguised and clumsy way Mr. Dixon chooses to pressure Boeing.
    But this is his good right!! Logically, if this were only a particular need of Qantas, unless they commit to very large order Boeing would not comply, but it gives additional support to my opinion that the lack of decision by Boeing to develop a B7811 (i.e. a B7810 with extended range and somewhat larger) could affect medium term the now so explosive B787 sales and hand over to Airbus the B773ER substitute market

    aminobwana
     
    astuteman
    Posts: 7075
    Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:29 pm

    Quoting Revelation (Reply 6):
    The real question is: is the A350XWB going to be competitive enough with the 787 to make a good ROI for Airbus? At this point, I'm a sceptic.

    The reason I'm not as sceptical is that the A350XWB, even if it doesn't "beat" the 787 (whatever that means) will still be way better than anything else an airline could buy in that class. Both of these planes will drive huge demand in the market for that reason.

    Quoting N328KF (Reply 9):
    (So far) the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate, and if some customers are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787.

    Y3 is still a potential stalking horse.

    It is?
    And it is?
    It's way too early to be dismissing -XWB sales
    Availability is bound to be a major factor.
    If the A350-XWB isn't roughly matching the 787 in year-on-year sales in 3 years time, come back to me.

    As for Y3, in order to "kill" the A350, it will have to offer the same step change over the A350, as the A350 and 787 offer over current aircraft (plus a bit more, as its likely to be bigger - ask Zvezda  Smile ).

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 14):
    but if you expand the A350's timeframe to include the time the original version was offered for sale as it did record firm orders which still stand on the books (as they await cancellation or conversion), the picture is not quite so rosy in terms of units sold over time.

    See above. It's probably way too early to comment on the "rosiness" of A350 sales - EIS is still 6 years away....

    Quoting Revelation (Reply 20):
    A) Airbus only needs an ROI that satisfies its internal goals
    B) I think Airbus's ROI on A320 and A330 must be pretty impressive
    C) Boeing has many partners feeding at the trough on the 787 program, so who knows what their ROI really is?

    Fair comments. It's very difficult to judge with any certainty the relative ROI's of each programme.
    Leaves plenty of room for our opinions, though  Smile

    Regards
     
    User avatar
    keesje
    Posts: 13583
    Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:32 pm

    Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 30):
    Keesje started a couple last week

     Confused Does it feel like that Ikra ?

    https://www.airliners.net/discussions...type=all&starter=1&search_active=1
    "Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
     
    bigjku
    Posts: 1906
    Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:37 pm

    Quoting StickShaker (Reply 27):
    To do so is a much more complex decision for Boeing as they need to be sure of a sufficient ROI to justify the much larger R&D cost of extending the platform beyond its originally intended design limits. Boeing can certainly develop the aircraft but would not want to do so for only a handful of customers - even if they are blue chip airlines. Given the significant amount of structural upgrades to support an increase in gross weight it is interesting to speculate the cost - I dont think Boeing would get much change from 2 to 3 billion dollars. The 345/346 program was costed at $3B when it was launched. Interested to hear what others may think on this one.
    Producing a standard 787-10 is a relatively easy decision - a 787-10ER requires a lot more study before taking the plunge.

    There is no reason Boeing cannot do both really. The 787-10 without major changes would suit a lot of airlines. However I think they will wait and see the final specs on the A350-900 and 1000 and they will then design 2 new 787 models with new undercarriage and wings to compete with those. Really they don't have to launch the program until 2010 or so because they could still get them out before Airbus can get the A350 into service.

    However I suspect you will hear something around the same time as the A350 specs start to firm up. It makes the most sense after all. Once they commit to the plan they can start some preliminary work and let airlines know that they are working on a 300 seat or so version and a 330-350 seat version and will finalize the specs once the A350 is done.

    I suspect you see 787-10 and 787-11 programs by the end of next year at the latest, though I am sure work is already being done on both internally.
     
    EI321
    Posts: 5028
    Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Fri Jul 13, 2007 11:57 pm

    Quoting Astuteman (Reply 32):
    As for Y3, in order to "kill" the A350, it will have to offer the same step change over the A350, as the A350 and 787 offer over current aircraft (plus a bit more, as its likely to be bigger - ask Zvezda ).

    It wont. Certainly not if it arrives as early as 2020.
     
    jimyvr
    Posts: 1597
    Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 1:08 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:06 am

    This has already BEEN DISCUSSED ALREADY
    Qantas To Order 70 planes including 20x787+NB Plus Fleet Spin Off (by Jimyvr Jun 28 2007 in Civil Aviation)
    1000 - 01MAR07 | http://airlineroute.blogspot.com/
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:15 am

    Quoting Keesje (Reply 26):
    If he needs something bigger, like a B777-300ER / A350-1000 sized aircaft, well, what did he say about the Boeing 777 again?

    The most important benchmark for QF is payload over range. That is why they pushed Boeing to build the 744ER because they needed that extra fuel to haul more payload. The 77W has an inferior payload over range profile then the 744 and 744ER, which is why airlines like QF and UA didn't buy it (and in QF's case, the 777 period) because they required what only the 744 can offer them at the time.

    So unless Boeing can create a 777-300LR that will fly 8000nm at full payload, well QF isn't interested. They're hoping Boeing will create a 787 that can do it, and are watching to see if Airbus can do it with a model of the A350 as a fall-back.

    And that QF is waiting for this leads me to believe Airbus may no longer be planning an A380-800R, since that would have been the logical choice for QF, and not a 777-300LR, 787-11LR, or A350-1000(R).

    Quoting StickShaker (Reply 27):
    Dixon is clearly telling Boeing that a 787-10 using the existing gross weight of the 789 is not what the market wants and that they should make the extra effort (ie commit to the significantly higher R&D cost) to produce a 787-10ER.

    We should be careful in saying "the market" when referring only to two players. A lot of airlines fly 777-200ERs, 777-200LRs, A340-300s and A340-500s and a 560,000lb MTOW 787-10 should more then match the performance (sans raw range in the case of 77L/A345) of all four models while handily exceeding them in economics.

    Notice how few airlines have bought the "8000nm" variant of each family - 48 77Ls to 430 772ERs and 33 A345s vs. 252 A342/A343. The market is there, yes, but there is a much larger market who find less then 8000nm to be "just fine, thank you" and prefer not to haul around the extra structure.

    Quoting BigJKU (Reply 34):
    There is no reason Boeing cannot do both really.

    Absolutely correct. We will most likely see both the 787-10 and 787-10ER announced, with probably a 2013 EIS for the -10 and a 2015-2016 EIS for the -10ER.

    Quoting EI321 (Reply 29):
    Looks like this could be yet another order for GE to loose.

    Earth to GE - Wakey Wakey!!!

    They've already sold QF hundreds of GEnx's, so they can afford to let RR get a couple dozen if necessary.  Smile

    Seriously, when GE comes on to the A350 program, if they can secure 50% or more of the market, crow's are going to be on the endangered species list... Big grin

    [Edited 2007-07-13 17:18:34]
     
    OldAeroGuy
    Posts: 3905
    Joined: Sun Dec 05, 2004 6:50 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:35 am

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
    The 77W has an inferior payload over range profile then the 744 and 744ER,

    Not true. Beyond about 5500 nm, the 773ER has better payload range than the 774ER. This is understandable because the design range of the 773ER is 7880 nm while the 744ER design range is 7650 nm.

    In addition, for most airlines, the 773ER MZFW payload is greater than that of the 744ER.

    In short, for airline operations, the 773ER payload range is better everywhere than the 744ER. The 744ER will carry more passengers by virtue of its greater passenger cabin floor area, but the greater cargo capacity of the 773ER gives it a higher payload capability.
    Airplane design is easy, the difficulty is getting them to fly - Barnes Wallis
     
    EI321
    Posts: 5028
    Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:35 am

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
    So unless Boeing can create a 777-300LR that will fly 8000nm at full payload, well QF isn't interested

    Woud'nt a 777-300LR need very long runway lengths?
     
    osiris30
    Posts: 2681
    Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 10:16 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:45 am

    Quoting WAH64D (Reply 10):
    same time see GE producing an engine for the A350-1000 as it will guarantee the potential ROI they seem so hung up on

    A publically traded company hung up on ROI.. heaven help us  sarcastic 

    Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 11):
    Hmm -

    787 launched 26/04/04 - sales 677 in 3.25 years

    XWB launched 01/12/06 - sales 170 in 0.75 years

    Indeed... Except that many of those XWBs were sold even before the product was launched as 350 Mk. 1-?? (I've honestly lost track of who ordered what at what stage).

    Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 13):
    What in the hell is Boeing waiting for??

    Some sort of remotely firm target to shoot for. Boeing wants to do enough to fend off the 350 and not outdate their 777 if they can help it. Until the 350-1000 is finally final Boeing has no need to launch a 787-10 or 787-11 or 787-9hgw, or 787-10er or any other variants we here at a.net might choose to dream up.

    Quoting Columba (Reply 28):
    Reminds me a little on the 737 Classic vs. A320.

    Yes, sure it does.. because clearly Boeing is looking to respond with a 777-NG rather than a 787-10 or -11. There is little similarity. Boeing will likely respond with a new frame, not a modernized older design like they did with the 737. That said the 737 has done an amazingly good job at holding order parity over the time period of 737NG vs 32x.

    Honestly, Dixon's comments are as useless and generic as SUH's on the 350. They are all hot air designed to push either manufacturer in the direction that the speaker desires. Dixon may be pushing Boeing bigger, while SUH want's Airbus to do something different in terms of construction. It *amazes* me that people who on one thread dismiss what SUH has to say, yet hang onto Dixon's statements in this thread like they are gospel. The same is also true in reverse, of course.

    Neither Boeing nor Airbus are stupid. Airbus may have management issues to deal with, but they ain't stupid. Boeing may have an older frame in the 777 to deal with, but they ain't stupid either. Let's just wait and see how this all plays out. It should only take a few months to get MUCH more clarity on what each vendor is going to do.
    I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
     
    cygnuschicago
    Posts: 518
    Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:34 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:46 am

    Quoting N328KF (Reply 9):
    so far, the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate

    That's kind of like saying "the sky is blue today".

    a) It's a larger plane = less orders
    b) it is still 6 to 7 years from EIS. 787 orders only started taking off 3 years from EIS.

    Quote:
    some customers are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787

    Actually, I think that should read "some a.netters are under the impression that it's older technology than the 787  Smile
    If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
     
    jacobin777
    Posts: 12262
    Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:49 am

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):

    Notice how few airlines have bought the "8000nm" variant of each family - 48 77Ls to 430 772ERs and 33 A345s vs. 252 A342/A343. The market is there, yes, but there is a much larger market who find less then 8000nm to be "just fine, thank you" and prefer not to haul around the extra structure.

    ..in all fairness however though Stitch, the -200LR and A345 came out years later....also, as you know, the -200F is also on the same platform....

    What's interesting is too see how Virgin Blue/Pacific (or whatever their name will be) will set their B773ER seating configuration and what the cargo loads will be..(if they carry cargo)...

    It will certainly be in contrast as to what QF is doing with their A380's...
    "Up the Irons!"
     
    cygnuschicago
    Posts: 518
    Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 3:34 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 12:50 am

    Quoting 797charter (Thread starter):
    Accoring to Flight, Qantas chief executive Geoff Dixon has made some interesting statements:

    "We are looking to Boeing to commit to a -10 aircraft with a longer range but with the same technology as the 787 aircraft", and

    "There is no doubt the A350 now is a very, very good aircraft."

    I've said it before, herein lies the problem for Airbus. The major customers have already selected the 787. Even if the A358 is better than the 789, or the A359 is better than the rumored 7810, it makes sense for these airlines to complement their fleets with more 789s and introduce the 7810, than select a slightly better A359 and thus introduce yet another type. Unless Airbus can make the A350 a step change better than the 787 - and I don't think they can - major airlines like Qantas will not purchase it.
    If you cannot do the math, your opinion means squat!
     
    TeamAmerica
    Posts: 1540
    Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:38 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:08 am

    Quoting N328KF (Reply 9):
    the A350 is selling at a fraction of the rate

    If speaking of rate rather than total sales, you are wrong.

    Quoting WAH64D (Reply 10):
    I think the A350 order book is very healthy considering the design is not yet frozen and there's 6 years left until EIS.

    The mid-size market is looking very strong. Regardless of the aircraft, booking this many sales so far in advance is extraordinary.

    Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 13):
    I think Boeing is really missing the boat by trying to milk a few 777 orders instead of developing the -10. This is the second large customer to say in public they want the -10. What in the hell is Boeing waiting for??

    An engine for the higher gross weight. It's the same issue Airbus faces with the A350-1000; a B787-10ER will cannibalize B777 sales. GE oddly seems to believe there is some way to avoid this outcome.

    Quoting Keesje (Reply 21):
    I don't know how many 787s were ordered 6 years before EIS (2002).

    You've already been dinged for this nonsense. The count would be same as those for the B797 or A360.

    Quoting Astuteman (Reply 32):
    The reason I'm not as sceptical is that the A350XWB, even if it doesn't "beat" the 787 (whatever that means) will still be way better than anything else an airline could buy in that class. Both of these planes will drive huge demand in the market for that reason.

    Exactly so. Airbus needs a competitive aircraft, but it need not be superior. The market is so large that neither supplier can monopolize it. The sales balance 15 years hence may be determined by which builder can deliver the most aircraft.

    Quoting BigJKU (Reply 34):
    There is no reason Boeing cannot do both really. The 787-10 without major changes would suit a lot of airlines.

    Agreed. I see sufficient market to cover the cost of developing the -10ER, especially considering that offering a full family of aircraft will boost sales of the other models. The -10ER itself need not be a huge seller itself to justify the effort.

    Quoting Stitch (Reply 37):
    Notice how few airlines have bought the "8000nm" variant of each family - 48 77Ls to 430 772ERs and 33 A345s vs. 252 A342/A343. The market is there, yes, but there is a much larger market who find less then 8000nm to be "just fine, thank you" and prefer not to haul around the extra structure.

    I agree with this also, but as I said above there is value in offering a full range of capability in the 787 family. Airbus has made the A350XWB family concept clear from the start, and Boeing needs to counter.
    Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
     
    EA772LR
    Posts: 1285
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:18 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:08 am

    Quoting BigJKU (Reply 34):
    There is no reason Boeing cannot do both really. The 787-10 without major changes would suit a lot of airlines. However I think they will wait and see the final specs on the A350-900 and 1000 and they will then design 2 new 787 models with new undercarriage and wings to compete with those

     checkmark  very well said. I think Boeing is going to wait and see the final specs on the 359, 3510. Even with new undercarriage, new wings, and new engines, Boeing still has plenty of time to present the HGW 787's to the market, potentially right around 2015, if not before. Though perhaps if Boeing is planning to do that, they should tell prospective customers they intend on waiting for final 350 specs, so they don't potentially lose the sales to Airbus.
    We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:22 am

    Quoting OldAeroGuy (Reply 38):
    Not true. Beyond about 5500 nm, the 773ER has better payload range than the 774ER. This is understandable because the design range of the 773ER is 7880 nm while the 744ER design range is 7650 nm.

    In addition, for most airlines, the 773ER MZFW payload is greater than that of the 744ER.

    Well I guess QF flies the 747 instead of the 777 for a reason, even though they were part of "Working Together" and that reason may very well negate the A350-1000 for QF, even though Dixon says he is looking at it, too.

    Quoting EI321 (Reply 39):
    Woud'nt a 777-300LR need very long runway lengths?

    I don't know. Guess it depends on MTOW, though GE now offers a "takeoff thrust bump" for the GE90-115B.

    Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 42):
    ..in all fairness however though Stitch, the -200LR and A345 came out years later....also, as you know, the -200F is also on the same platform....

    True, but we still see airlines adding 772ERs as their first type as well as doing 772ER add-ons rather then going to the 772LR, which is almost the same price once discounts are added. On the flip side, we also see airlines doing the opposite (AI, AC and DL, for example), so maybe it's a wash.

    [Edited 2007-07-13 18:27:45]
     
    Maersk737
    Posts: 660
    Joined: Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:37 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:25 am

    Quoting EA772LR (Reply 45):
    Though perhaps if Boeing is planning to do that, they should tell prospective customers they intend on waiting for final 350 specs, so they don't potentially lose the sales to Airbus.

    Will this work for Boeing ? Just waít and see what Airbus will come up with, and we will do it better. Are You sure the potential costumers will wait?

    Cheers

    Peter
    I'm not proud to be a Viking, just thankfull
     
    User avatar
    Revelation
    Posts: 22680
    Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:27 am

    Quoting Maersk737 (Reply 47):
    Will this work for Boeing ? Just waít and see what Airbus will come up with, and we will do it better. Are You sure the potential costumers will wait?

    Why wouldn't they wait to see what will be offered? Both A350 and B787 production seems to be sold out till 2015 or so.
    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: 26710
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    RE: Dixon: "A350 Now Is A Very, Very Good Aircraft"

    Sat Jul 14, 2007 1:28 am

    Quoting Maersk737 (Reply 47):
    Will this work for Boeing ? Just wa�t and see what Airbus will come up with, and we will do it better. Are You sure the potential costumers will wait?

    Many did for Airbus and the A350...

    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