Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
CFBFrame
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 7:09 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:15 pm

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 44):
Hence why Boeing really needs the B777-X to remain competitive in the top end of this market.


Agreed, it is very important to have something to hold your marketshare.

Quoting flood (Reply 40):
Perhaps your quote is outdated, as Leahy said on Tuesday "the day we deliver the first A350-1000, the 777-300ER will become obsolete". Further, he credited the 777 for being the right aircraft "if you need lift in the long-range widebody market now".

We'll see what the future holds for the program. If I'm wrong I'll eat crow, but for now the market has confirmed the -1000 to be a dog. The future, Airbus better get to work and come up with an aircraft that creates a reason for Boeing to be concerned!!!!!! Now, the A330 and the 777 are the industry standards.
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Thu Jan 19, 2012 10:30 pm

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 50):
If I'm wrong I'll eat crow, but for now the market has confirmed the -1000 to be a dog.

Better start eating crow  .

Like I said before:

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 49):
And since the program is so far away, many jump to conclusions too soon. The A35J has more orders now then the B77W had 2 years in production. And we all know how Boeing turned that around once the real performance exceeded everybody's (including themselves) expectations. Normally customers will order a plane like the A35J (first free slots at the earliest in late 2018 or early 2019) in 2015-2017. That is the normal window for orders to come in. And we are a long way off that mark but still many people (not you &nbsp  have already dismissed the A35J. Well, I know for sure that they are wrong by a long way!  .

So the market has not spoken at all yet, and is also not likely to do so for another 3-4 years. The A330 and the B777 are indeed the standards of the Industry now. Soon (in about 5 years or so) the B787 and the A350 will be the Industry standards.  . More precisely my guess and full expectation is that the B787-9/10 and the A359/A35J will be the Industry standards.
 
AngMoh
Posts: 1077
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 5:03 am

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Thu Jan 19, 2012 11:56 pm

Quoting CFBFrame (Reply 50):
We'll see what the future holds for the program. If I'm wrong I'll eat crow, but for now the market has confirmed the -1000 to be a dog.

  

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 48):
I think Boeing is trying to exploit the fact that the -1000 is struggling to meet customer requirements which is why they see an opportunity to revamp the 777 to keep some of the large twin market.

  

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 49):
Btw, these two customers ordered first, then also started pushing for changes (increased capabilities). And when the changes were done they were initially not happy with them. (EK wanted even (much) more. More then even the B777-9X as speculated today, could ever give them. Those comments are for 99% politically motivated in my opinion.

  

Nothing is confirmed by the market on the -1000. The customer requirements mentioned are more dreams than requirements. What EK wants is not possible with today's technology. Maybe 10 years from now it is, but not today. To think that B "just" builds a 777NG which can do this without issues is not understanding the effort which goes into this. The 777NG as well as -1000 still has to be profitable and build at volume, so it is not possible to throw every facncy new technology at just to make the specs go through the roof. It is a delicate balance of cost and performance. QR and EK are very good at pushing A & B to the limit and moving this limit forward. This is all a part of this process.
727 732 733 734 735 73G 738 739/ER 742 743 744/M 752 753 762 772 77E 773 77W 788 A300 A310 A319 A320 A321 A332 A333 A343 A345 A346 A359 A35K A388 DC-9 DC-10 MD11 MD81 MD82 MD87 F70 ERJ145 E170 E175 E190 E195 ATR72 Q400 CRJ200 CRJ700 CRJ900 BAE146 RJ85
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:45 am

I do think in the end, Rolls-Royce may have to up the thrust of the Trent XWB to around 105,000 to 110,000 lbs. for the A350-1000. If Airbus were to "lock" the A350-1000's range to around 8,100 nm, they might be able to meet the MTOW targets for the plane.
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 5375
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 12:50 am

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 53):
I do think in the end, Rolls-Royce may have to up the thrust of the Trent XWB to around 105,000 to 110,000 lbs. for the A350-1000.

Thus taking it virtually up to the GE90-110/115? Why? The A350-1000 is lighter and benefits from being a more recent (and therefore more efficient) design. There's no way it should need the same thrust as the 777-300ER.

Moreover, what's the thrust requirement Boeing have asked GE and RR for with regard to a possible 777X...?   
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 6:47 am

Quoting PM (Reply 54):
Thus taking it virtually up to the GE90-110/115? Why? The A350-1000 is lighter and benefits from being a more recent (and therefore more efficient) design. There's no way it should need the same thrust as the 777-300ER.

Moreover, what's the thrust requirement Boeing have asked GE and RR for with regard to a possible 777X...?  

There is a very specific reason the 77W needs 115klbf, to manage the starts. The 352t MTOW of the 77W pushes the wingloading to the limit at about 800kg/m2, this needs hefty engines to manage runway needs and also engine-out situations. There are other drawbacks as well like low initial FL and high drag.

The 35J has a more normal wingloading at 650kg/m2 can therefore use more normal start engine thrusts.

This is also the very reason the 777-X needs a new larger wing and can live with sub 100klbf engines like the 35J.
Non French in France
 
XT6Wagon
Posts: 2739
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:06 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 7:55 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 42):
As such, I find myself in agreement with those that believe it is just the airline exercising some capital re-alignment in uncertain times.

Might have even been at Airbus's request. The A351 clearly is most at risk for delays among the A350 family and Airbus may have asked for its A351 customers to cough up slots to provide for the current plans for this program. They just chose to cancel to clean up thier own books.
 
81819
Posts: 2008
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 9:13 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:26 am

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 47):

Sponsor Message:

I can't find the quote but Tim Clark from EK did state their numbers on the A350-1000 suggested the aircraft would have a lower payload than the 77W. He also stated replacing 77W's with A350-1000's would result in lower revenues.

Again, I can't find the quote but I think he also mentioned that Boeing only needed to make the 77W 10% more efficient for it to remain competitive with the A350-1000.

My personal opinion is that for the 777 family to remain competitive it needs to go on a substantial diet and have 10% improvements in engine SFC, but I'd suggest Boeing have a better handle on this than me.

A question. What is the maximum monthly output of A350's? Can the program support the manufacture of more than three A350-1000's per month?
 
Daysleeper
Posts: 567
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:33 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 1:10 pm

Quoting travelhound (Reply 57):
I can't find the quote but Tim Clark from EK did state their numbers on the A350-1000 suggested the aircraft would have a lower payload than the 77W. He also stated replacing 77W's with A350-1000's would result in lower revenues.

We have discussed this at length in the 77X thread. The 77W only has a 3t payload advantage over the A35J until we reach 6000nm where the A35J overtakes the 77W to an eventual 20t advantage at 8500nm.

All this is somewhat academic, though, as someone has already mentioned the real problem is cargo density, there just isn’t enough physical space to get anywhere near the weight limits. So it becomes somewhat of a no-brainer to compare them. They are almost identical in size yet the A35J is significantly lighter, using lower thrust more efficient engines. I just can’t see how this would result in lower revenues; all I can think of is that he was speaking before the latest update to the A35J.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27495
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 2:25 pm

Quoting travelhound (Reply 57):
I can't find the quote but Tim Clark from EK did state their numbers on the A350-1000 suggested the aircraft would have a lower payload than the 77W.

It was EK VP of Route and Fleet Planning Richard Jewsbury. And his comments were in March of 2008, which is before the A350-1000 underwent her performance upgrading.

Said comments were that on the same mission, the A350-1000 would carry 6 tons less payload (317 seats vs. 354), but would burn 11% less fuel per seat and 21% less fuel per trip.

[Edited 2012-01-20 07:17:55]
 
astuteman
Posts: 7289
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 3:04 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 59):
Said comments were that on the same mission, the A350-1000 would carry 6 tons less payload (317 seats vs. 354), but would burn 11% less fuel per seat and 21% less fuel per seat.

Which I think was 11% less fuel per seat and 21% less fuel per trip IIRC...

As Ferpe's chart show, that payload delta, for the old A350-1000 was a maxima, and was at the point of the 773ER's max structural payload range, of 5 700Nm
Beyond 5 700Nm, the A350-1000 gradually narrowed the gap until it had caught up at 8 000Nm

Airbus addressed this by increasing the MTOW, and moving the A350-1000's max payload range up to at least the same range as that of the 773ER's, in the process endowing the A350-1000 with better payload capability beyond 5 700Nm.

I believe the upping of the A350-1000's MZFW also addressed any maximum payload shortfall..

Rgds
 
ferpe
Posts: 2667
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 7:44 am

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Fri Jan 20, 2012 5:12 pm

Quoting astuteman (Reply 60):
I believe the upping of the A350-1000's MZFW also addressed any maximum payload shortfall..

Not quite, A only upped the MZFW with 1.5t to 220t but the OEW went up with 2.4t to 152t so the MSP actually decreased with about 1 ton. But the MSP was not their problem area, they were volume limited in the practical case, the problem was the range at MSP which was extended by 400nm to close the gap to the 77W.
Non French in France
 
flythere
Posts: 207
Joined: Sat May 22, 2010 3:24 pm

RE: Etihad Cancels Six A350-1000

Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:16 am

Now that CX is the new owner for the 6 delivery slots as EY cancelled.


6 More A359 For Cathay Pacific (by cloudyapple Jan 19 2012 in Civil Aviation)

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