User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Wed Aug 08, 2007 10:59 pm

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 148):
Of the repeat orders, only Emirates and Qatar were actually followup orders (all the rest were option conversions). They've actually had more cancellations than followup orders.

I agree that the A380 is starting off in the 747's shoes and will probably be much more successful that current sales would indicate. However, I think we're kidding ourselves if we think that the current A380 order book can be taken as a "success" as it stands today.

Funny how every a380 order since it inception is downplayed here on a.net. Because it was only an Emirates order, an order from an Airbus countries, just a conversion of options, just a follow up order. Pathetic.

When the Boeing groupies were in the middle of another Airbus A380 schade freude hurray another delay party, blue chip airlines reaffirmed their commitment with more orders.

The music stopped and lighttubes were switched on. For a few seconds the crowd was back on their feed.

Seems we' re back to square one now, time for some further announcements.

"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
EI321
Posts: 4999
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:06 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 54):
And please note that Airbus is not only announcing their product, but taking orders, even though they are saying the specs will not be finally until Oct 2008.

And theres something strange about this? For example, was the 787 given design freeze in May 04? It was still the shark plane back then but that did not seem to be an issue with airlines willing to order.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 149):
Mr. Dixon is making a number of assumptions

Is Dixion less informed then you or me?

Quoting Poitin (Reply 149):
1) the A 350-1000 will do all Airbus promises.

Theres some reason to assume that it wont have 20%+ lower fuel burn than the 777-300ER? The 787 is already hitting these figures over the A330-200 and 767-300. The A350-1000 will have lower OEW per seat, more efficient engines and advances in aerodynamics over the 787. Its a no brainer.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 149):
2) that Boeing is not going to react with a lighter better version of the 777

They might, but they would do well to close the gap to 15%. There's a similar situation being played out today between the 777 and the A340.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 149):
3) that the 787-11 is actually a good idea given that the 787 is designed and optimized around a medium sized figuration.

The 787 is certainly not optimised towards a 787-11. Even the 787-10ER will need some redesigning.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 149):
4) Boeing can not or will not produce a better larger aircraft to replace the 777 completely.



Quoting Poitin (Reply 149):
5) that Boeing can't do this before the A350-1000 ever sees the light of day which is at least 8 years from now.

Even Boeing themselves have said that the 737 replacement will come before Y3, if Y3 ever gets built. That means we are looking at 2020+ for EIS, hence Boeings hints at a 777 improvements.

You mention three assumptions above - 777 lite, 787-11 and Y3. Boeing can only do one of these before 2020, not all three.
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:33 pm

Quoting EI321 (Reply 151):
The A350-1000 will have lower OEW per seat, more efficient engines and advances in aerodynamics over the 787. Its a no brainer.

Those are the claims. The question is whether Airbus can achieve it. The A350 will almost certainly have more efficienc engines, given that they're getting a clean-sheet design with about 5 years on the current generation so, I agree, that's a no brainer.

Having a lower OEW per seat is a different question...Airbus does not have a good record of building light. CFRP should help but it's by no means assured that they can achieve the weight target they have set for themselves.

Having more advanced aerodynamics than the 787 is certainly something that Airbus should shoot for but I'm not aware of anyone that knows what that actually means in concrete terms. Historically, Boeing has been the strongest of all the OEM's at aerodynamics and aerodynamic improvements go at a much slower pace that structures, engines, or systems. It's not at all clear how Airbus will produce better aerodynamics than the 787. Given that Airbus has lots of smart engineers, I'd assume they'll be as good as the 787 but it's not at all clear that it will be better.

Tom.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26508
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:39 pm

Quoting Poitin (Reply 149):
5) that Boeing can't do this before the A350-1000 ever sees the light of day which is at least 8 years from now.

6) That QF actually has a mission for this type of aircraft...  Wink

Quoting EI321 (Reply 151):
{Poitin, )you mention three assumptions above - 777 lite, 787-11 and Y3. Boeing can only do one of these before 2020, not all three.

I do not think Boeing will work too hard to improve the 777, but instead just try and work deals and minor improvements to serve as a bridge to a Y3 with full EIS in 2020 - what Airbus has successfully done with the A330 and the A350.

If I was running Boeing, I'd introduce the 787-10 with a 275t MTOW and existing engines by 2013. It will cover all of the A333 and 772A market and should be good enough for much of the near-term A343 and 772ER replacement market. And then I'd EIS Y3 in two sizes (350 seats and 400 seats) in 2020. I'd use special leaseback deals on the 77L to block the A359 because those planes will make great 777BCFs. The 77W has a long life ahead of it with carriers even after the A350-1000 and Y3-200 EIS, so I'd be willing to do special leaseback deals on her, as well.

All of the above could be done, I believe, without impacting the 737RS in 2014-2015.
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Wed Aug 08, 2007 11:55 pm

Quoting Gbfra (Reply 144):
Sorry for my disrespect of the two golden rules of a.net:

1. You are only allowed to mention the B787 if you praise it
2. You are only allowed to mention the A380 if you bash it.

I leave this kind of nonsense to others.

Why leave nonsense to others when you are a master of it?

Obviously my humour escaped you. For that I apologize.

However, I take issue with your contention that the A-380 is so recognizable that millions of people will know it on sight given the inability of so many people to tell the difference between an A320 and a 747 or an L1011 and a 737, etc. Even with AIRBUS painted on the biggest flying billboard I doubt all those millions of people will put two and two together. Indeed, I can't think of any feature of the A380 that makes it so recognizable except to enthusiasts and a few of the general public, and even enthusiasts have confused it with a 747 at a distance.
 
drexotica
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 3:44 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:00 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 143):
Anyone who thinks that the A380 won't become a readily recognisable, possible even iconic aircraft, is kidding themselves.

Count me in that group then Astuteman.

The A380 is in no way as historically significant as the 747. Try reading some aviation history to put it in better perspective (e.g., Gandt's Skygods, Joe Sutter's 747 book, etc.). As for iconic, my guess is that it will be considered the "ugly 747" by the flying public.

Face it - the A380 is a delta plane (delta: incremental improvement on existing technology); nowhere near as revolutionary as the 747 was over the 707/DC-8 (r.e., capacity, range, economics).
N707PA - Best looking commercial aircraft ever.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:00 am

Quoting Tdscanuck (Reply 152):
Having a lower OEW per seat is a different question...Airbus does not have a good record of building light. CFRP should help but it's by no means assured that they can achieve the weight target they have set for themselves.

Having more advanced aerodynamics than the 787 is certainly something that Airbus should shoot for but I'm not aware of anyone that knows what that actually means in concrete terms. Historically, Boeing has been the strongest of all the OEM's at aerodynamics and aerodynamic improvements go at a much slower pace that structures, engines, or systems. It's not at all clear how Airbus will produce better aerodynamics than the 787. Given that Airbus has lots of smart engineers, I'd assume they'll be as good as the 787 but it's not at all clear that it will be better.

I sense some strong believes and convictions here that are based on some general sentiments here on a.net.

You can say anything on Boeing here on a.net. They are to narrow, to big, ugly, delayed, overbudget whatever. However there is the open nerve.

Saying Airbus made a smarter engineered, more innovative and better quality aircraft.

That touches some fundamental values that give no room for compromises Big grin

Still they did it & its what made them right pass Boeing in recent times.  duck 
"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
TKV
Posts: 368
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:59 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:01 am

Quoting Gbfra (Reply 144):
Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 136):
Why would I ask someone who believes that a passenger like myself, who is willing and able to pay for business class is going to want to stop in Dubai on my way from the West Coast or East Coast of the USA just to get to India or Africa.

Just because US airlines couldn't even afford to buy the A380 this doesn't mean that those planes, that will be build in the coming years, will be empty

I do not see that the reasonable question by Flysherwood has been responded here.

Quoting Gbfra (Reply 144):
Anyone who thinks that the A380 won't become a readily recognisable, possible even iconic aircraft, is kidding themselves

I agree. But will it be competitive and profitable ?? I assume that the question by Flysherwood addresses precisely this all important issue: will the pax, and especially the premium class ones, accept to fly through megahubs like the Persian Gulf's, which seems a pre-condition for its success ??

And I add:

Except on a few super-routes, where a high frequency would be possible even with such large aircraft, will the pax prefer a larger aircraft or a higher frequency ?? Notice that the slot availability at the mega-airports will become more manageable because point-to-point flights from secondary airports will de-congest the former !

The A380 configuration concept, inspired by the certainly not worldwide typical oil producer countries, is based on a increased comfort and luxury in the Premium classes, but certainly not for the Economy pax, where their extreme high number means increased inconveniences at boarding and more so at deplaning. And precisely, as mentioned above, the premium passengers are the less prone to accept hubs instead direct or non-stop, the luxury does not compensate many hours more trip time on already too long flights.

And the CASM, which normally would favor the use of VLA as long as the load factor remains adequate,
would not help too much the A380 (many on this Forum consider it over-dimensioned even for 550-600 pax), as the smaller, but far more up-to-date composite aircraft as the B787 or A350 discussed here [/b], will have similar CASM, added to the higher frequency !![b]

These are questions which IMHO should be addressed not only by the airlines, but by the Forum !!

TKV
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:11 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 146):
Another recent article:

That's just a rehash of the Dominic Gates article we've already discussed in another thread, a thread which you posted in. Seattle PI: Airbus A350 Muscles In On The 777 (by Douwd20 Jul 31 2007 in Civil Aviation)
Noting new here.
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:27 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 156):
You can say anything on Boeing here on a.net. They are to narrow, to big, ugly, delayed, overbudget whatever.

Of course you can, Keesje. That's how it should be on a discussion forum.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 156):
Saying Airbus made a smarter engineered, more innovative and better quality aircraft.

That touches some fundamental values that give no room for compromises

Of course you're entitled to say that too. But, looking back over the last 20 years or so, since the advent of the A330, I'd have to ask the obvious question.

Which 'smarter engineered, more innovative and better quality aircraft' did you have in mind?  Smile
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:30 am

Quoting Khobar (Reply 154):
I can't think of any feature of the A380 that makes it so recognizable

Actually it may become to be known as the second flying pachyderm (white) after Dumbo!  duck 
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:40 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 143):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 137):
to the masses..it will be a "jumbo jet" and "jumbo jet=B747".....

Anyone who thinks that the A380 won't become a readily recognisable, possible even iconic aircraft, is kidding themselves.
Sorry.

..I guess we can agree to disagree on this point  Wink, but besides its sheer size, the A380 doesn't offer anything "distinctive" (unless one regards the size of the airplane itself as distinctive) like the B747 does with its infamous "hump".

Quoting Gbfra (Reply 144):

Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 136):
Why would I ask someone who believes that a passenger like myself, who is willing and able to pay for business class is going to want to stop in Dubai on my way from the West Coast or East Coast of the USA just to get to India or Africa.

Just because US airlines couldn't even afford to buy the A380 this doesn't mean that those planes, that will be build in the coming years, will be empty.

..last I recalled, some of those B777s weren't too cheap either. According to reports, FX paid close to list for the -200LRs (those aren't cheap)....

Quoting Gbfra (Reply 144):

I leave this kind of nonsense to others.

....I wish you did but some of your comments have shown otherwise.. Wink
"Up the Irons!"
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:50 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 156):
Saying Airbus made a smarter engineered, more innovative and better quality aircraft



Quoting Keesje (Reply 156):
Still they did it & its what made them right pass Boeing in recent times.

 no   laughing   no   laughing   no   laughing 

Which aircraft would that be Keesje?!?!  wave 
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8572
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 12:58 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 150):
Funny how every a380 order since it inception is downplayed here on a.net. Because it was only an Emirates order, an order from an Airbus countries, just a conversion of options, just a follow up order. Pathetic.

What's pathetic about looking at the actual order book? Take a look at the actual orders:
http://www.myaviation.net/webimages/?pid=00001091

A380 is running about 25% behind the 747, which is widely acknowledged to have had an extremely rock start.

In case anyone is wondering, the methodology here is orders (not options) logged on the day they were confirmed.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 156):
However there is the open nerve.
Saying Airbus made a smarter engineered, more innovative and better quality aircraft.
That touches some fundamental values that give no room for compromises
Still they did it & its what made them right pass Boeing in recent times.

Which Airbus is smarter engineered, more innovative, and better quality than it's Boeing counterpart? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but a claim like that should be substantiated with specifics.

Tom.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6947
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:09 am

Quoting DrExotica (Reply 155):
The A380 is in no way as historically significant as the 747. Try reading some aviation history to put it in better perspective (e.g., Gandt's Skygods, Joe Sutter's 747 book, etc.). As for iconic, my guess is that it will be considered the "ugly 747" by the flying public.

Face it - the A380 is a delta plane (delta: incremental improvement on existing technology); nowhere near as revolutionary as the 747 was over the 707/DC-8 (r.e., capacity, range, economics).

What the hell has any of that to do with "recognisable by the travelling public"?
As for your guess as to what the public will make of its looks - you're welcome to it.

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 161):
I guess we can agree to disagree on this point

Then we most certainly do.
If the A380 looks so bloody much like every other aircraft, how come it's so f**king ugly?  Yeah sure

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 161):
the A380 doesn't offer anything "distinctive"

See above. Which is it?
 
EI321
Posts: 4999
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:11 am

Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 162):
Which aircraft would that be Keesje?!?!

I think he's comparing either the A320 & 737-300. The Airbus was launched a few years later than the boeing (1980 & 1982).
 
EA772LR
Posts: 1285
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:18 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:12 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 153):
I do not think Boeing will work too hard to improve the 777, but instead just try and work deals and minor improvements to serve as a bridge to a Y3 with full EIS in 2020 - what Airbus has successfully done with the A330 and the A350.

If I was running Boeing, I'd introduce the 787-10 with a 275t MTOW and existing engines by 2013. It will cover all of the A333 and 772A market and should be good enough for much of the near-term A343 and 772ER replacement market. And then I'd EIS Y3 in two sizes (350 seats and 400 seats) in 2020. I'd use special leaseback deals on the 77L to block the A359 because those planes will make great 777BCFs. The 77W has a long life ahead of it with carriers even after the A350-1000 and Y3-200 EIS, so I'd be willing to do special leaseback deals on her, as well.

All of the above could be done, I believe, without impacting the 737RS in 2014-2015.

 checkmark  I couldn't agree more Stitch. This is EXACTLY what I was thinking. Many airlines who have ordered the 77W/L won't even receive these planes for years. They will be in NO need to replace these aircraft when by the 350 EIS.

Quoting TKV (Reply 157):
Except on a few super-routes, where a high frequency would be possible even with such large aircraft, will the pax prefer a larger aircraft or a higher frequency ?? Notice that the slot availability at the mega-airports will become more manageable because point-to-point flights from secondary airports will de-congest the former !

TKV you bring up a good point. With more point-to-point services, you've freed up more slots at airports, so airports become less congested, or at the very least no more congested. I have had that conversation with many of my freinds over a beer, and the general concensus was that we'd all love to fly on the 380, but in the end would prefer the smaller point-to-point service of the 787/350 instead. But we don't speak for all of the passengers in the world.
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:13 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 150):
Funny how every a380 order since it inception is downplayed here on a.net. Because it was only an Emirates order, an order from an Airbus countries, just a conversion of options, just a follow up order. Pathetic.

Don't get so emotional. It's only a machine...
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
GRIVely
Posts: 143
Joined: Wed Dec 13, 2006 5:46 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:20 am

Keesje,

I have read your numerous posts in support of the A380 with interest and noted how clearly your enthusiasm comes through. Given the questions and criticisms, news articles, and interviews that have cast doubts upon the economic viability of the A380 just think how satsifying it will be for you when the 700th A380 is delivered to its customer, the program achieves break even, and all of the nay sayers have to eat their words. I hope they will all then acknowledge your prescience in so clearly seeing the potential of the GWA (Great White Airplane).

Conversely, if the A380 does not quite measure up to your hopes and expectations and is, indeed, somewhat of a commercial failure I am certain you will be a gentleman and generously agree that perhaps another company made the right decision when they walked away from building a superjumbo.

The nice thing about this issue is that in less than five years the market will have provided an answer to all of these vexing questions.

Regards,

GRIV
 
EI321
Posts: 4999
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:21 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 153):
If I was running Boeing, I'd introduce the 787-10 with a 275t MTOW and existing engines by 2013.

I think this is exactly what Boeing should do, but are the existing 787-9 engines, gear and wing tips sufficient to bump the MTOW up to 275t without any practical changes?

[Edited 2007-08-08 18:25:24]
 
EA772LR
Posts: 1285
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:18 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:22 am

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 167):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 150):
Funny how every a380 order since it inception is downplayed here on a.net. Because it was only an Emirates order, an order from an Airbus countries, just a conversion of options, just a follow up order. Pathetic.

Don't get so emotional. It's only a machine...

C'mon Keesje. It's just planes we're talking about here. We're all the same, just a bunch aviation enthusiasts!!  Wink  Big grin
We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:26 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 165):
I think he's comparing either the A320 & 737-300. The Airbus was launched a few years later than the boeing (1980 & 1982).

So that would be akin to comparing something like the 787 to the A300? or the 787 to the A330?  Wink
 
EI321
Posts: 4999
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:38 am

Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 171):
Quoting EI321 (Reply 165):
I think he's comparing either the A320 & 737-300. The Airbus was launched a few years later than the boeing (1980 & 1982).

So that would be akin to comparing something like the 787 to the A300? or the 787 to the A330?

Not sure why you would use those examples. Theres a 32 year gap between the launches of the A300 and 787, and theres a 17 year gap between the launches of the A330 and 787.

On the other hand, the 737-300 and A320 are much more comparable time wise to the 787 and A350XWB. Like the 737-300 and A320, there is a 2 year gap between launches and a 4-5 year gap between the EIS of the 787 and A350XWB.
 
hawkercamm
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 4:15 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:38 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 169):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 153):
If I was running Boeing, I'd introduce the 787-10 with a 275t MTOW and existing engines by 2013.

I think this is exactly what Boeing should do, but are the existing 787-9 engines, gear and wing tips sufficient to bump the MTOW up to 275t without any practical changes?

Actually 272t would be enough to carry 290 pax 8500nm or 330 8000nm. However a 6 wheel MLG would be required and this would push MTOW nearer to 275T.

It may be better to develop a new wing with new engines and develop a 787-10 and 787-11 for ~330seats and ~370seats (9-abreast) with 8200nm each. The 787-10LR could then be developed from the -11 with ~9500nm. Development cost $5B. EIS for 1st A/C 2014/2015. The -10 and -11 can make use of tailplane and fin, fuse and nose from baseline aircraft and share systems architecture and cockpit.

Much better than pumping several $B into the 777 program.
 
EI321
Posts: 4999
Joined: Tue Jul 07, 2009 4:43 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:47 am

Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 173):
Much better than pumping several $B into the 777 program.

Definitely. I dont believe that Boeing are serious about putting several billion into the 777. Without the Trent XWB the effect would be moribund anyway and the GE agreement kills the possibility of using these engines.

Its either spend a few billion on a warmed over 777 or spend a few billion on a truly capable A350 competitor.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6947
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:52 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 164):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 161):
I guess we can agree to disagree on this point

Then we most certainly do.
If the A380 looks so bloody much like every other aircraft, how come it's so f**king ugly?

Please accept my apologies, Jacobin.
You are not an approriate target for such a comment.
Consider it withdrawn.

Regards
 
JTR
Posts: 77
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2007 3:45 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 1:52 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 156):
You can say anything on Boeing here on a.net. They are to narrow, to big, ugly, delayed, overbudget whatever. However there is the open nerve.

Saying Airbus made a smarter engineered, more innovative and better quality aircraft.

That touches some fundamental values that give no room for compromises

It seems to me that saying Airbus screwed up going forward on the A380 project touches a few nerves as well. I hope that you can at least admit that possibility.
 
User avatar
sunrisevalley
Posts: 5392
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:02 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 169):
think this is exactly what Boeing should do, but are the existing 787-9 engines, gear and wing tips sufficient to bump the MTOW up to 275t without any practical changes?



Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 173):
Actually 272t would be enough to carry 290 pax 8500nm or 330 8000nm. However a 6 wheel MLG would be required and this would push MTOW nearer to 275T.

It may be better to develop a new wing with new engines and develop a 787-10 and 787-11 for ~330seats and ~370seats (9-abreast) with 8200nm each. The 787-10LR could then be developed from the -11 with ~9500nm. Development cost $5B. EIS for 1st A/C 2014/2015. The -10 and -11 can make use of tailplane and fin, fuse and nose from baseline aircraft and share systems architecture and cockpit.

Much better than pumping several $B into the 777 program.

Read Widebodyphotogs take on the issue in reply 70 at
Aboulafia: A350 Competitive Threat To Boeing (by NYC777 Aug 6 2007 in Civil Aviation)

He raises an interesting point ( among others) about the ability to develop the GEnX engine much further.
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty S

Thu Aug 09, 2007 2:03 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 164):

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 161):
I guess we can agree to disagree on this point

Then we most certainly do.
If the A380 looks so bloody much like every other aircraft, how come it's so f**king ugly?  sarcastic 

..don't throw me in that camp mate (about the ugly part)...I just think its a large plane (for the most part)..but those wings are damn impressive  Wow! (unfortunately most pax will never appreciate those wings, which I think are definitely the coolest part of the bird)...

(photo from Airbus video)

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 164):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 161):
the A380 doesn't offer anything "distinctive"

See above. Which is it?

...the former...nothing distinctive for vast majority of pax... Wink
"Up the Irons!"
 
baroque
Posts: 12302
Joined: Thu Apr 27, 2006 2:15 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:11 am

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 178):
..the former...nothing distinctive for vast majority of pax

I agree that a high proportion of pax will not even work out it has four engines, the 55% who are not on the top deck or cannot see the stairs will not figure out it is a full double decker, BUT if cattle class gets more space than has been the case, they WILL remember that.

So it depends on how all that space is used. If airlines use it to give just 10 to 15% more space in cattle class, the steers will remember it! So it depends quite a bit on what the airlines actually do. If the space all waffles off into business and first, the majority will just think something along the lines of "Heck that was a big plane and just as uncomfortable as all the others". But that need not happen. If it does not, then the A380 will be recognised and sought after even by those who are not sure how many engines it has. My  twocents 
 
hawkercamm
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 4:15 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty S

Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:24 am

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 177):
He raises an interesting point ( among others) about the ability to develop the GEnX engine much further.

Why GEnx? RR are developing a new engine in the 87klb to 95klb for the A350XWB. A derivative of this would be good enough. Hey RR could suggest to Beoing how they might develop their aircraft to make it work with their Trent XWB.  laughing 
Now that would put pressure onto GE  biggrin 

Seriously, I think a re-winged/re-engined 787 could deliver a real competitor to the bigger A350s with 1/3 to 1/2 the development cost of a new aircraft. It could also have major commonality with the current 787-8/-9 in terms of cabin, systems, cockpit, crew training, etc, that will minimise the costs to the airlines. It could also be available 2015. A new Y3 will be way off, 2020 at best.

The next thing to consider is that the cross-sections of A350/B787 are very efficient. They both package the 8/9 abreast layout very efficiently from a structural point of view, weight per pax and aerodynamics. I'm not sure the 11 abreast cabin that is talked about on a-net will be equally efficient. It will create significant wasted space in the belly and crown, also for evacuation 11-abreast would force doors to be closer together than you may require for galleys/toilets and thus waste more space. Furthermore producing an elliptical cross section on the side will not work. Unlike A380 and B747 forward section there will not be the floor beams to take the tension of pressurisation loads.

So stretching the current cross section to the limit (taking note of the increase stiffness of CFRP) may be a good bet to get you to 380seats (9-abreast).

That then leaves Y3 to attack 400+ should Boeing see a big enough market or is this 787-8  confused  . Y3 being a double deck 3-4 aisle.  confused 
Also it may be smarter between 2015-2020 to develop 2 families of aircraft to replace the A320/B737.
See reply 3 Boeing Y1 Rumor And Speculation (by TSS Aug 4 2007 in Civil Aviation)
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty S

Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:32 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 175):
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 164):
Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 161):
I guess we can agree to disagree on this point

Then we most certainly do.
If the A380 looks so bloody much like every other aircraft, how come it's so f**king ugly?

Please accept my apologies, Jacobin.
You are not an approriate target for such a comment.
Consider it withdrawn.

No apologies needed from you Astuteman, I know you are one of the more classier (as well as having one of the highest integrity) A.netters here........ Smile

Like I said, if I could put you on my RSU again I would.... Wink
"Up the Irons!"
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26508
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 3:44 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 169):
I think this is exactly what Boeing should do, but are the existing 787-9 engines, gear and wing tips sufficient to bump the MTOW up to 275t without any practical changes?

It should. The current gear is good for 280t and the wings can take up to 320t with minor strengthening. The engines at 75,000lbs should be plenty to lift 275t and GE and RR should easily make that with the GEnx/Trent 1000.

Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 173):
Actually 272t would be enough to carry 290 pax 8500nm or 330 8000nm. However a 6 wheel MLG would be required and this would push MTOW nearer to 275T.

Six-wheel bogies are not necessary until MTOW exceeds 280t.

Quoting SunriseValley (Reply 177):
He raises an interesting point ( among others) about the ability to develop the GEnX engine much further.

I don't think GE can easily take the GEnx to 80-85,000lbs, but 75,000lbs will be plenty for a 275t 787-10 and that should be doable since GE planned to offer it for the original A350.
 
hawkercamm
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 4:15 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty S

Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:10 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 182):
It should. The current gear is good for 280t and the wings can take up to 320t with minor strengthening. The engines at 75,000lbs should be plenty to lift 275t and GE and RR should easily make that with the GEnx/Trent 1000.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...50-900-xwb-variant-but-doubts.html

Baseler says that taking the 787-10 from the “low 7,000nm range category to the low 8,000nm category is a step-change” which means it will take longer to develop. He adds that it will require increased weights, more powerful engines, stronger landing gear and wing changes.

Taking this further a low 7000nm -10 becomes a low 6000nm -10 in 9-abreast and 330/340seats. QF/EK will consider the 9-abreast -10. It therefore holds that the cheap and cheerful -10 will not meet their needs. Furthermore for QF/EK a low 6000nm -10 (330/340seats) will have negligible cargo capability at ranges around 6000nm. Additional to QF/EK are most Asian/ Pacific rim airlines.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:27 am

Quoting GRIVely (Reply 168):
The nice thing about this issue is that in less than five years the market will have provided an answer to all of these vexing questions.

GRIVely, it would be an early moment IMO. E.g. the final verdict on the 747 wasn´t made in 1975 / 76. In those years Boeing delivered 20-30 747s a yr. Airlines were introducing trijets and Boeing developed the 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100SP, 747-100SR, 747-200, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200M and 747-200F to meet different customer requirements.

Production picked up again in the late seventies more then 10 yrs after introduction. Lets give the A380 10 years too.

I think the pessimism on the A380 is concentrated on a.net & predominantly folks from a certain corner of the world.

In reality in 10 years hundreds of A380s will cross the oceans and poles at any given moment, realizing efficiencies & scale unmatched by other aircraft. That´s what Airbus, Singapore Airlines, Emirates, Malaysian, Lufthansa, Air France, Korean, Udvar Hazy, Qantas, China Southern, Qatar, Thai, Virgin and even Boeing think. Some enthousiasts here on a.net seem to have a problem accepting the future. No problem it will grow  Wink

"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
hawkercamm
Posts: 108
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 4:15 pm

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:31 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 182):
The current gear is good for 280t

Am I misunderstanding your units? By 280t do you mean 280 short tons ie 254011.727kgs or 560,000lbs?
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 1011
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:46 am

Quoting EI321 (Reply 174):
Definitely. I dont believe that Boeing are serious about putting several billion into the 777. Without the Trent XWB the effect would be moribund anyway and the GE agreement kills the possibility of using these engines.

Its either spend a few billion on a warmed over 777 or spend a few billion on a truly capable A350 competitor.

Interesting point, however let us consider one more possibility: An upgraded GE115. This plus a few other improvements could maybe 1/2 the difference to the 3510 (8% of the 787's gains were purportedly due to engines). This could keep the 777 in the game if it was done sooner than the 3510. This engine could also be an interemdiate step to the GE 3510/Y3 engine.

Considering the time value of money, an upgraded 777 sooner, with a followon Y3 in 2020 might fit some airlines growth mapping better. Less savings, sooner = more savings later, but a better step change replacement in 2020 = better long term return.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty S

Thu Aug 09, 2007 4:54 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 184):
GRIVely, it would be an early moment IMO. E.g. the final verdict on the 747 wasn´t made in 1975 / 76. In those years Boeing delivered 20-30 747s a yr. Airlines were introducing trijets and Boeing developed the 747-100, 747-100B, 747-100SP, 747-100SR, 747-200, 747-200B, 747-200C, 747-200M and 747-200F to meet different customer requirements.

Production picked up again in the late seventies more then 10 yrs after introduction. Lets give the A380 10 years too.

Hello!, Keesje--It's not 1975/76 anymore. The world has changed! Back in those days there were no ETOPS 767s, A330s and 777s to do long-haul flights like there are today. And next year the 787 will enter service further undercutting the case for the Whalejet.

Airbus has belatedly admitted their mistake and is working on the A350.

The A380 may sell hundreds (200 hundred, 300 hundred ore even 400 hundred, but that won't be enough to turn a profit and therefore can't be called a success. It's time to face the facts.

[Edited 2007-08-08 22:15:58]
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26508
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 5:03 am

Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 183):
QF/EK will consider the 9-abreast -10. It therefore holds that the cheap and cheerful -10 will not meet their needs.

There are many other airlines besides QF and EK in the world, and they may find a 560,000lb 787-10 with 6000nm "real" range loaded with a full cabin and a full cargo hold to be sufficient.

QF and EK will either go with the A350 or, more likely, QF will go with Y3 (to leverage their 787 investment) and EK will order both the A350 and Y3.  Wink

Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 185):
Am I misunderstanding your units? By 280t do you mean 280 short tons ie 254011.727kgs or 560,000lbs?

I mean 560,000lbs. And 640,000lbs for the wings.

I prefer not to use ton(ne)s because of the confusion, but many folks here do so I sometimes drift back and forth.  Smile
 
drexotica
Posts: 150
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2004 3:44 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 5:56 am

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 164):
Quoting DrExotica (Reply 155):
The A380 is in no way as historically significant as the 747. Try reading some aviation history to put it in better perspective (e.g., Gandt's Skygods, Joe Sutter's 747 book, etc.). As for iconic, my guess is that it will be considered the "ugly 747" by the flying public.

Face it - the A380 is a delta plane (delta: incremental improvement on existing technology); nowhere near as revolutionary as the 747 was over the 707/DC-8 (r.e., capacity, range, economics).

What the hell has any of that to do with "recognisable by the travelling public"?
As for your guess as to what the public will make of its looks - you're welcome to it.

Funny guy...

Here it is again:

1. 747 is more significant historically than the A380.
2. A380 is not particularly different in general appearance than the 747 (other than missing a hump and having a fat forehead).
3. Technologically, the A380 is a delta, particularly in comparison to what the 747 did.

Got it?
N707PA - Best looking commercial aircraft ever.
 
User avatar
keesje
Posts: 13308
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2001 2:08 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:34 am

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 187):
The A380 may sell hundreds (200 hundred, 300 hundred ore even 400 hundred, but that won't be enough to turn a profit and therefore can't be called a success. It's time to face the facts.



Quoting DrExotica (Reply 189):
Here it is again:

1. 747 is more significant historically than the A380.
2. A380 is not particularly different in general appearance than the 747 (other than missing a hump and having a fat forehead).
3. Technologically, the A380 is a delta, particularly in comparison to what the 747 did.

How is it possible to make a verdict on an aircraft that hasn´t even entered service, will remain in production for at least another 25 yrs & has a market backed up by Boeing, RR and Airbus market forecasts.

What do you folks know that the rest of the industry doesn´t know?

We better warn the industry before they make any more stupid decisions..

"Never mistake motion for action." Ernest Hemingway
 
baron95
Posts: 1106
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 10:19 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 6:38 am

Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 173):
Much better than pumping several $B into the 777 program.



Quoting HawkerCamm (Reply 173):
Much better than pumping several $B into the 777 program.



Quoting EI321 (Reply 174):
Definitely. I dont believe that Boeing are serious about putting several billion into the 777.

Except that all you guys are forgeting about production capacity and profit potential. Look at it this way:

1 - Boeing sales and marketing is selling every possible slot it can get from the production guys (Boeing Mfg + Partners) with 788s and 789s. If they get one more slot freed up they sell it tomorrow. The sales guys are not asking for product enhancements. They are happy with the catalog they have to sell. They are just constrained in produciton.

2 - There is little opportunity to up production of 787 more. Composity/Titanium supply is tight. The suppliers are already pushed tothe max.

In the mean time....
3 - In the 2010s there will be plenty of capacity on the separate and more conventional 777 line. I'm willing to bet that that line will continue to sell very well up to the 1015 delivery slots (when A350-1000 EIS) and reasonbly well (like A333/767-300/400) after that EVEN IF BOEING DOES NOTHING to the 777. Just because of availability.

4 - The 777 sales team though, IS going to be asking for product improvments to drive better margins vis a vis the A350.

So....

Despite being a generation older, it MAY in fact make more sense for Boeing to pay for plastic surgery on the older sister rather than braces on the yourger/hotter one.
Killer Fleet: E190, 737-900ER, 777-300ER
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:18 am

Quoting Gbfra (Reply 190):
Who cares about their moaning and grumbling?

You apparently do, as each post you make becomes more and more unhinged.

Quoting Keesje (Reply 191):
How is it possible to make a verdict on an aircraft that hasn´t even entered service,

You seem to have...  Yeah sure
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
flysherwood
Posts: 881
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 2:58 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:41 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 190):
How is it possible to make a verdict on an aircraft that hasn´t even entered service,

I believe we can come to the conclusion that the 787 will be a success even though it has not entered EIS. I believe we can come to the verdict that the A350 will be a success before EIS if Airbus meets its promises and goals. We can come to the conclusion that the 747-8 will be a success because of all the interest in the freighter version and the fact that Boeing is spending only around $4 billion in development costs rather than the $18+ billion that Airbus has eaten up on the A380. Any reasonable person can come to these conclusions. The success or failure of the A380 cannot be determined as yet, but "early" indications (7 YEARS) does not bode well for it to even recoup the investment.
 
khobar
Posts: 1336
Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:12 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 7:50 am

Quoting Keesje (Reply 190):
How is it possible to make a verdict on an aircraft that hasn%uFFFDt even entered service, will remain in production for at least another 25 yrs & has a market backed up by Boeing, RR and Airbus market forecasts.

You are here now saying that Boeing and Airbus agree as to the size of the market - they don't.

Quoting Flysherwood (Reply 160):
Actually it may become to be known as the second flying pachyderm (white) after Dumbo! duck

Actually, make that (at least) the third - the 747 was called the "Dumbojet" early on.
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 1011
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 8:27 am

It's far too early to gauge the success of the A380. Markets have surprises. Right now the stampede is to point to point and this should continue with open skies. However the rate of air travel growth could exceed current projections as I believe it has done recently. Enough expanded total growth might more create optimal A380 routes, though there probably will be even more 787/350/Y3 routes proportionately.

Re: the A380, I think it's way too early to write off an aircraft with a wing that can accomodate two streches. It has plenty of time to morph into an effective freighter as well, the aircraft has strengths that some astute operator is bound to exploit. FEDEX had a very compelling case for single aircraft trips to China w/ the A380.
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3531
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 8:48 am

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 192):
Quoting Keesje (Reply 191):
How is it possible to make a verdict on an aircraft that hasn?t even entered service,

You seem to have...

Great line! ROTFL -  rotfl 

Quoting Keesje (Reply 184):
In reality in 10 years hundreds of A380s will cross the oceans and poles at any given moment,

Regardless of how well the A380 sells, this is a bit of an exaggeration, Hundreds at any given moment? I think not.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26508
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:07 am

Quoting ER757 (Reply 196):
Regardless of how well the A380 sells, this is a bit of an exaggeration, Hundreds at any given moment? I think not.

Considering many long-haul 747 flights depart and arrive within very narrow windows all around the world, it might not be a stretch to imagine that, as those 747s are replaced with A380s, a large number of them will be in the air simultaneously.
 
Lumberton
Posts: 4176
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 7:34 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:12 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 197):
it might not be a stretch to imagine that, as those 747s are replaced with A380s, a large number of them will be in the air simultaneously.

A380s or 773ERs (or A346s).
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
 
User avatar
ER757
Posts: 3531
Joined: Tue May 10, 2005 10:16 am

RE: Udvar-Hazy Interview 787-350 And Other Nifty Stuff

Thu Aug 09, 2007 9:47 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 197):
Considering many long-haul 747 flights depart and arrive within very narrow windows all around the world, it might not be a stretch to imagine that, as those 747s are replaced with A380s, a large number of them will be in the air simultaneously.

How many 747's do you suppose are in the air at any given moment? I don't know myself, just wondering if you'd hazard a guess. Don't count domestic flights within Japan as they aren't "over the oceans or poles." Also, keep in mind that not nearly all the 747's will be replaced by A380's. I'd say many more will be replaced by the likes of the 77W and in the future the A350-1000. So that's one big reason I found Keesje's statement a bit hyperbolic.

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