• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 1011
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:23 am

Quoting rotating14 (Reply 6):
(2) The plane would need to not hinder the sales prospects of the A380 from above and the A35K from below.

If Airbus builds this, they will be accepting what happens to the A380, it will take market away from it just like the 777. There would be no point in building it otherwise.
 
justloveplanes
Posts: 1011
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 5:38 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:26 am

Quoting WIederling (Reply 39):
I don't think the airbus wing is "too small" in comparison.
But we could say that the 777-8X is too heavy for the delta in capabilities.
( oew 155t versus 188t for a 33t delta going by preliminary data i could find.)

Are we assuming they aren't going to re-wing the aircraft or put in folding tips?
 
AvObserver
Posts: 2605
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2002 7:40 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:51 am

Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 50):
If Airbus builds this, they will be accepting what happens to the A380, it will take market away from it just like the 777. There would be no point in building it otherwise.

You nailed it; it will cannibalize A380 sales to some extent unless it's a simpler stretch that doesn't match up to the 777-9X range and/or payload capability. Airbus must accept some cannibalization of the A380 if it goes forward with this.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Posts: 12654
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:39 am

Quoting rbrunner (Reply 14):
I just read something about $75m for a pair of slots at LHR. Makes you stop and think, right?

Makes you think that:
  • the two incumbent carriers have (1) a niche fleet of A380s and (2) an oft-delayed order for such that no one realistically expects them to take anymore.
  • we haven't seen a mad rush of carriers purchasing A380s solely for expansion into LHR, instead they'd prefer to.... spend $75million on more slots, either that, or start up LGW


    Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 19):
    When you start spending this much money for more slots, could you better spend that money on a bigger aircraft instead?

    If you could justify having a small subfleet dedicated to a specific destination. Seems for most airlines, unless they have several routes that make sense for the aircraft, it's better to just buy/lease the slots.
  • I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
     
    User avatar
    seahawk
    Posts: 8938
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 7:16 am

    Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 27):
    Everyone knows the A380 needs an upgrade, with or without A350-1100, as it faces competition from the smaller 777-9.

    But with this A350-1100 Airbus might no longer need the A380.
     
    PhoenixVIP
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:41 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 7:59 am

    Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 37):

    Nor is the XWB-97. We are talking about engine technology post 2020.  
    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
    Not sure why that is. That is the earliest A350 availability at this point. New engine and new wing in 5 years?

    Even if they are at the same time any A350 slots filled up by the A350-1100 will hurt A359/A351 availability which I presumed would fill the line for the next 10 years anyway. I continue to think this is a bad idea before ~2025 or so.

    5 years is enough time to increase capacity on the flight line. And again the theory of new engine and new wing. Current wing and PIP XWB-97 for 7500 nautical miles at full payload. That is a decent medium and regional aircraft enough to cover transatlantic transpacific and transcontinental flights. Like the 787-10 that most posters fail to mention.

    Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 45):

    The 773 is true in that it didn't sell well though we are looking at a market from a long time ago and was designed as a 'light' 747 replacement. Better efficiency at high capacity without the need of the 777X range should be adequate at covering a replacement 77W market over the next decade especially from European carriers.

    Quoting AvObserver (Reply 52):

    The A380 will get a neo and I am sure it will get stretched to the -900. It won't get cannibalised at all. Saying the A350-1100 will cut sales from the A380 or any upgrade of the A380 is like saying the 787-10 will take sales away from the 777-9. It hasn't and the 787-10 is also a fantastic stretch that has already sold over 100 copies.
    Inspire the truth.
     
    User avatar
    enzo011
    Posts: 1706
    Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:12 am

    Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 50):
    If Airbus builds this, they will be accepting what happens to the A380, it will take market away from it just like the 777. There would be no point in building it otherwise.

    I don't understand how this would take sales from the A380. The 779 will already put pressure on the A380, so an airline will look to buy either an A380 or 779. If you have a larger A350 then the option is A380 or 779/A350stretch. Those that need the extra A380 capabilities will still buy the A380, those that do not need it will now either buy the 779 or the new A350. It seems like people are suggesting that a new A350 will cut demand for the A380 again. Maybe if there was no 779, but there is already an offering in this space. The only orders it will eat into is the 779.

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 48):
    I personally believe that those don't need the 779 range will want the A351 already. Don't see a great demand for an immediate A350-1100. Late next decade I do.

    Why? The A35K has more range than the 779. If you said capabilities it would make sense, but not range.
     
    olle
    Posts: 1240
    Joined: Tue Feb 06, 2007 3:38 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:21 am

    We have a parameter or even the "elefant in the room" in this game.

    Price of oil.

    The urgency of upgrading the A380 beyond adding 11 abreast and PIPs to gaing 3-4% fuel burn might be the tipping point for the current A380 operators to accept replacing A380 with new A380CEO until an A389 is out 2025 with new engines.

    Airbus move to 20+ frames production per year with Air Iran, Saudi, Turkey being new customers.

    Do anyone see EK and SQ replacing their current A380 with something smaller? I do not. LHR will not have the 3rd runway for many years to come.

    And even with a third runway EK has 6 daily to LHR and a number of them to Gatwick.

    Their expansion in Germany is happening right now with Hamburg coming further or later.
     
    User avatar
    scbriml
    Posts: 17795
    Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 9:08 am

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 48):
    It does mitigate it but its still a lack of commonality which will still bring headaches or the added fees of power by the hour relative to one engine on all future members of the 787 or the 777X is real. Someone has to pay for that complexity and duplicacy of parts/training/spares.

    Yet there are airlines out there that run fleets of A330s and 777s with multiple engine manufacturers under the wings. There are airlines out there that run fleets of A32x with both CFM and IAE engines (not as a result of mergers). It doesn't seem to be a major issue at all.   

    Quoting AvObserver (Reply 52):
    You nailed it; it will cannibalize A380 sales to some extent unless it's a simpler stretch that doesn't match up to the 777-9X range and/or payload capability. Airbus must accept some cannibalization of the A380 if it goes forward with this.

    Wait. In any thread where the A380 is mentioned, many members take great delight in pointing out its lack of sales. You can't have it both ways.     

    It's the same nonsense that people talk about A330neo sales coming at the expense of an A350 sale. Guess what? Airbus really doesn't care because every A330 or A350 sale is one less 787 or 777 sale Boeing will make. Delta Air Lines.
    Time flies like an arrow. Fruit flies like a banana!
    There are 10 types of people in the World - those that understand binary and those that don't.
     
    User avatar
    enzo011
    Posts: 1706
    Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 9:32 am

    Quoting scbriml (Reply 58):
    Wait. In any thread where the A380 is mentioned, many members take great delight in pointing out its lack of sales. You can't have it both ways.     

    It's the same nonsense that people talk about A330neo sales coming at the expense of an A350 sale. Guess what? Airbus really doesn't care because every A330 or A350 sale is one less 787 or 777 sale Boeing will make. Delta Air Lines.

    It really seems as though the thought is out there that the Boeing sales is predetermined already. Anything Airbus does will not affect Boeing as they will forever be running at 100% capacity and any other sales are due to not being able to deliver to all airlines or because Airbus gives their products away. No matter how much this is disputed it comes up again and again and by different posters at different times.

    This is similar to the way the US3 talked about EK and taking away passengers, like it is their right to these passengers and they don't have to work to keep them.
     
    WIederling
    Posts: 8887
    Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 10:28 am

    Quoting justloveplanes (Reply 51):
    Are we assuming they aren't going to re-wing the aircraft or put in folding tips?

    I was just tipping over roseflyers argument
    that "The A350-1000 wing is much smaller than the 779X wing"
    ( and thus would be massively undersized for any A350 growth beyond the -1000.)

    Actually the reverse is "trueer" for about the same wing area the 779X is ~44t / 14% heavier
    with a significant part fixed on the OEW ( ~33t ). IMU the 779X will show best performance
    as advertised at the longest ranges only.
    Murphy is an optimist
     
    Aither
    Posts: 1208
    Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 10:57 am

    Quoting enzo011 (Reply 56):
    I don't understand how this would take sales from the A380. The 779 will already put pressure on the A380, so an airline will look to buy either an A380 or 779. If you have a larger A350 then the option is A380 or 779/A350stretch. Those that need the extra A380 capabilities will still buy the A380, those that do not need it will now either buy the 779 or the new A350. It seems like people are suggesting that a new A350 will cut demand for the A380 again. Maybe if there was no 779, but there is already an offering in this space. The only orders it will eat into is the 779.

    Where you need capacity you can jump straight to the A380 and organize things to make it a cash cow OR you can take an intermediate step with the 777-9 OR you can take the A350-1000 for more flexibility.
    The fact is all these aircraft compete on the same markets the same way airlines would hesitate between A320s and A330s on many markets : it's not because 2 aircraft are different that they do not compete. 777-9X, A380, A350-1000, a stretch A350 would all be compared to each other for the same big routes. If the A350 stretch is better than the 777-9X there is absolutely no doubt that it would hurt the A380 sales that are already quite low.
    Never trust the obvious
     
    LPSHobby
    Posts: 454
    Joined: Tue May 01, 2007 9:14 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:16 am

    they are saying a wider fuselage, why a wider fuselage instead of a stretched fuselage, wich are the possible advantages of a wider fuselage over a stretched one?
     
    ap305
    Posts: 1501
    Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:32 am

    Quoting LPSHobby (Reply 62):
    they are saying a wider fuselage, why a wider fuselage instead of a stretched fuselage, wich are the possible advantages of a wider fuselage over a stretched one?

    Who is saying wider fuselage?
    Racing, competing, is in my blood. It's part of me, it's part of my life; I've been doing it all my life. And it stands up before anything else- Ayrton Senna
     
    User avatar
    JerseyFlyer
    Posts: 1418
    Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:34 am

    Quoting trex8 (Reply 44):
    Wasnt the whole point of the hardware changes on the XWB97 to maintain time on wing???? IIRC RR said they could get the thrust to ?95K with the 84 but the increased temps would hit longevity so they made hardware changes to increase thrust and keep the reliability etc.

    This means the original engine would have maxed out at 95k.

    It seems most unlikely that RR would have changed hardware to get from 95k to 97k without building in some margin for a further thrust bump beyond 97k.
     
    ap305
    Posts: 1501
    Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:37 am

    Bloomberg has a further update...

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...how-for-update-on-bigger-a350-1000

    Quote:
    “We’re starting to conclude that perhaps there is such a market and now we’re talking to key airlines about what we might be able to do in that market but no final decision has been made,” Leahy said. “We’ll certainly be able to give you an update at Farnborough.”
    Racing, competing, is in my blood. It's part of me, it's part of my life; I've been doing it all my life. And it stands up before anything else- Ayrton Senna
     
    ap305
    Posts: 1501
    Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:41 am

    ^^^^^

    According to that article Leahy also states that the aircraft will have more capacity than the 777-9x
    Racing, competing, is in my blood. It's part of me, it's part of my life; I've been doing it all my life. And it stands up before anything else- Ayrton Senna
     
    User avatar
    JerseyFlyer
    Posts: 1418
    Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 11:42 am

    From the Bloomberg piece referenced at reply 65:

    "Leahy said that the Rolls-Royce Plc engines now offered for the A350-1000 would be sufficient to power a larger variant, though would likely need some thrust added."
     
    Ruscoe
    Posts: 1740
    Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 12:15 pm

    Quoting PhoenixVIP (Reply 55):

    Nor is the XWB-97. We are talking about engine technology post 2020.

    The XWB97 first ran in mid 2015, I believe, and as a result of that, underwent some changes, to improve reliability, but the current engine being tested on the 380 is the production engine (and they did no high altitude testing on the 97 prior to it going on the wing), according to Rolls Royce themselves.

    If one reads the press releases from RR, they are all about pushing the limits to get the required performance and reliability. Lets hope they do, but I also think there is substantial risk.

    Perhaps someone can explain,why a slower fan speed is good for the GTF on the 320, and a 6% faster fan (than the 84) is a good thing on the 97. I am no engine specialist, but my reading is that lower fan speeds are more efficient.
    I have not seen a weight for the 97, but expect it will be higher, so post 2020, for the reasons given, its a new engine imo, not tweaking of the 97.

    Ruscoe

     
     
    WIederling
    Posts: 8887
    Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:12 pm

    Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 68):

    usually the faster the merrier  
    i.e. a faster turning smaller turbine or compressor shows better gains and needs less surfaces and
    allows higher pressure ratio per stage. ( see the LEAP LP turbine versus the GTF turbine.)

    for good propulsive efficiency you want the fan to cover as much area as possible.
    ( more volume moved requires less overspeed for the same thrust )
    tipspeed limits ( from noise and stuff ) force the max rpm for the fan.

    If RR has not maxed out fan rpm ...
    ( there must be more to this tradeoff that RR does.
    coreflow is said to be higher ( less BPR )
    the fan has a smaller spinner and ?reaches further out into the nacelle?)

    they said sfc is the same.
    Murphy is an optimist
     
    PhoenixVIP
    Posts: 374
    Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:41 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:12 pm

    Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 68):

    Engineers push the limits. That is their very job. I believe Boeing pushed the limits of the 777-9 and it has proven to be an excellent long range aircraft that has found a niche with the ME3. Same with the XWB-97 to build a strong foundation for the revamped A350-1000 several years back. They did that and now technology has moved forwards again for change.

    The A380 testbed allows for high altitude testing. Of course they can't do testing without mounting it on an aircraft first. Bit silly to say actually. Which engine manufacturer doesn't improve reliability from development?

    A faster or slower fan depends on the bypass ratio and the core of the engine itself. The very design of the XWB-97 is to generate additional thrust whilst maintaining efficiency where there is 5% larger core and higher temperature capability and unshrouded turbine blades. Bearing in mind also the A350 is a composite aircraft as oppose to the traditional A320 so the efficiency of the engine alone will account for the savings of the A320 or 737. Post 2020 there will be plenty of PIPs and upgrades to make the XWB-97 even more efficient and those are the limits that allow for aircraft like the A350-900LR that Philippines just ordered today. Oh and Leahy pretty much said in todays press conference no change to engine type, only thrust. That debunks any engine change theory.

    [Edited 2016-02-17 05:15:36]

    [Edited 2016-02-17 05:17:08]
    Inspire the truth.
     
    Asiaflyer
    Posts: 873
    Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:50 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:26 pm

    Quoting Aither (Reply 61):
    777-9X, A380, A350-1000, a stretch A350 would all be compared to each other for the same big routes. If the A350 stretch is better than the 777-9X there is absolutely no doubt that it would hurt the A380 sales that are already quite low.

    True, but with the exception that a A350-1100 will have shorter range than the others, based on current information and assumptions.
    Someone mentioned a likely range of about 11-12 hours which would disqualify the A350-1100 from quite a few routes, today flown by 77W and A380.
    SQ,MI,MH,CX,KA,CA,CZ,MU,KE,OZ,QF,NZ,FD,JQ,3K,5J,IT,AI,IC,QR,SK,LF,KL,AF,LH,LX,OS,SR,BA,SN,FR,WF,1I,5T,VZ,VX,AC,NW,UA,US,
     
    dare100em
    Posts: 275
    Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:34 pm

    Quoting ap305 (Reply 66):
    According to that article Leahy also states that the aircraft will have more capacity than the 777-9x

    I'm curious how they will achieve this. Definitely a stretch to 80m. But wing modifications are unavoidable too in that case. However this is in conclusion with what F.B. said that this plane "Is essentially a clean-sheet" and "won't be called A350-1100". Interesting.

    Quoting Asiaflyer (Reply 71):
    True, but with the exception that a A350-1100 will have shorter range than the others, based on current information and assumptions.

    From what we hear since some time that isn't a given. I think people bought to much in the "no moonshot" stuff of the old Boeing CEO. Airplane OEM's ALWAYS like to twist existing frames to the limits until they're forced otherwise. McDonnell Douglas comes to mind which took it to extremes with the DC10. Airbus tried that too with the A340 and A350MKI-II-II. However that doesn't always work well. It seems Airbus is willing to spend big on this one and build a plane slightly above the 777-9X in nearly any measure beside max payload. If that is the case Boeing maybe wondering if the 50% clean-sheet 777X gets them only 30% of such.

    [Edited 2016-02-17 05:43:20]
     
    User avatar
    enzo011
    Posts: 1706
    Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 1:49 pm

    Quoting Aither (Reply 61):
    Where you need capacity you can jump straight to the A380 and organize things to make it a cash cow OR you can take an intermediate step with the 777-9 OR you can take the A350-1000 for more flexibility.
    The fact is all these aircraft compete on the same markets the same way airlines would hesitate between A320s and A330s on many markets : it's not because 2 aircraft are different that they do not compete. 777-9X, A380, A350-1000, a stretch A350 would all be compared to each other for the same big routes. If the A350 stretch is better than the 777-9X there is absolutely no doubt that it would hurt the A380 sales that are already quite low.

    I think we can safely say that the A380 is a niche aircraft that will only have a few routes and airlines interested in operating it. When an airline has the sufficient traffic on a route they will look at the A380. They will not look to buy it if they only have enough traffic for a 77W. We are talking about 100-200 extra seats to fill. So if an airline is looking at a 77W replacement they will only look at the A380 in certain limited circumstances. This is evident from the sales of the A380.

    Now if the options for an airline looking for growth of the 77W but not the A380, there is only one option, 779. If however Airbus offers an alternative how would this then take away sales from the A380? We are told constantly on here the A380 is dead and the 779 is killing it. You are not going to see more sales in that market because there is a third option, you will see the same number of sales but split between the three models on offer. So a sale for the new model is a sale away from the 779 or A35K, not the A380. And if the airline decided on either the A35K or the new A350 stretch, it is a sale from the 779.
     
    mjoelnir
    Posts: 8941
    Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:31 pm

    Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 68):

    The Trent XWB 97 keeps the fan size of the 84. RR made two changes to move more air with the same fan outer diameter,
    they decreased the hub and they run the fan faster.
    You can not compare a Trent, being a three spool design, directly to a P&W GTF. The fan speed of the Trent is not influenced by the intermediary compressor and turbine speed, it is running slower. Works similar to having a gear between the intermediary shaft and the fan. Letting the fan run a bit faster works like a change of the ratio in the gear on the GTF.
     
    rheinwaldner
    Posts: 1810
    Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 4:58 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:45 pm

    Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 12):
    If that's the alternative to installing 9 abreast (extremely unlikely on the 779) and suffering in terms of economic competitiveness I don't see any other way, CX and SQ will/would go 10 abreast.

    Of course being able to stay at 9 abreast would be another plus for an A350-based solution.

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 48):
    Don't see a great demand for an immediate A350-1100. Late next decade I do.

    So you are saying there is also no great demand for the 777-9 either? For sure the 777-9 and the A350-1100 would share and cover any demand there is.

    From my perspective an even longer A350 would make a lot of sense and would really have the potential to hurt the 77X business case. Because (similar like the MAX) the 77X program costs much more than a simple stretch of the A350 would and require a larger production run to return the investment.

    Except for the longest-range/highest-capacity routes, the A350-1100 could serve large portions of the long haul market and push the 77X even further away from the mainstream, than it is pushed already today. The A350-1100 would be a very tough competitor to the 777-9 for European&US&ME3&Asian airlines for anything but their longest routes. And the longest routes tend to be thinner, so smaller A350 variants exist to cover that.
    Many things are difficult, all things are possible!
     
    Aither
    Posts: 1208
    Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 3:43 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:57 pm

    Quoting enzo011 (Reply 73):
    When an airline has the sufficient traffic on a route they will look at the A380. They will not look to buy it if they only have enough traffic for a 77W.
    Quoting enzo011 (Reply 73):
    Now if the options for an airline looking for growth of the 77W but not the A380, there is only one option, 779. If however Airbus offers an alternative how would this then take away sales from the A380? We are told constantly on here the A380 is dead and the 779 is killing it.

    I must disagree on that. Airlines are not chasing growth but profits in priority and the traffic can be adapted, in particular on the large markets (that's revenue management)
    If I'm looking for something bigger than our 77W of course I would look at the 779. However the cost of the additional capacity is rather high and the flexibility is less compared to the A350-1000. So I may opt for the A350-1000 even if it means lower traffic. I may also opt for an A380 or consider another frequency if possible if I've been spilling many passengers or have new ambitions, partnership etc.. But the A350 stretch can be the right spot if I can have these additional seats for a very low additional trip cost. If the 779 is killing the A380 as you said well a stretch A350 would do even more harm and in particular if it takes the number of A380s in the fleet below a certain limit.
    You can see with my example all these aircraft are clearly competing between each other.
    Never trust the obvious
     
    Chaostheory
    Posts: 1134
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 2:59 pm

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 48):
    its still a lack of commonality which will still bring headaches or the added fees of power by the hour relative to one engine on all future members of the 787 or the 777X is real. Someone has to pay for that complexity and duplicacy of parts/training/spares.

    Naturally, an engine rated at 84k is going to have a much lower contracted cost than one rated at 97k simply because of the lower maintenance burden. That's applicable to engines that are 100% common too. The provision of spare engines is included in RR TC agreements so it's largely immaterial that the 84k/97k+ aren't the same. For the larger airlines that plan on operating substantial fleets, RR will stock spare engines at their hub(s).
     
    User avatar
    KarelXWB
    Moderator
    Topic Author
    Posts: 26968
    Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:25 pm

    Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 28):
    The 350-1100 with 97,000lbs on board would be a great regional aircraft, but not a great long range aircraft.
    Quoting TP313 (Reply 17):
    MTOW: somewhere between 325 and 330 T

    range (with 390 pax): 7800 nm

    Design range is just one thing, better to look at MZFW range.

    At 308 tonne MTOW it would have a MZFW range of some 4,100 nm, similar as the 787-10. If Airbus can increase the MTOW to 328 tonne, MZFW range would go up to ~ 4,750 nm.

    If we take the following MZFW range figures:

    - B773: 3,600 nm
    - B789: 5,500 nm
    - A359: 5,500 nm
    - B78X: 4,000 nm
    - A35K: 5,700 nm
    - A350-1100 308 tonne: 4,100 nm
    - A350-1100 328 tonne: 4,750 nm
    - B77W: 5,500 nm
    - B779: 5,700 nm

    At 308 tonne it would have similar range capabilities as the 787-10, and slightly better capabilities than the 777-300. At 328 tonne however, it would be fair bit better than the 787-10, and significant better than the 777-300 was during its time. It would be a very good regional machine. For long-haul, it would fit right between the A35K and B779 in terms of range capabilities.

    On the left we have the A35K with an OEW of 155 tonne. On the right we have the B779 at 190 tonne OEW. Between them is a gap of 35 tonne that can be easily filled with another A350 stretch, putting the A350-1100 at some 165 tonne OEW.

    We however don't know if there's a market for such airplane.
    What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
     
    User avatar
    KarelXWB
    Moderator
    Topic Author
    Posts: 26968
    Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:30 pm

    Quoting kurtverbose (Reply 23):
    Any ideas on an engine? I hear the XWB-97 is maxed out so if an A350-1100 needed more thrust RR would be looking at another derivative with a bigger fan.

    Not entirely correct, the XWB-97 engine does have some margin built in.

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 35):
    3 different engines for 3 different A350s!

    Trent XWB maintenance is done by RR TotalCare, any differences between the engines are not a concern for the customer.

    Also note, Trent XWB-84 and XWB-97 are the same family with 80% commonality. They are not completely different as you claim.

    [Edited 2016-02-17 07:33:56]
    What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
     
    User avatar
    KarelXWB
    Moderator
    Topic Author
    Posts: 26968
    Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:43 pm

    Quoting MrHMSH (Reply 45):
    I think the question here is how large the market is for a (relatively) short range A350-1100, because this is a vaguely similar market (albeit 20 years on) to the 773, which didn't sell terribly well, despite theoretically having the CASM advantage over the 77E.

    Airlines prefer flexibility. They don't just order a widebody aircraft to run 3,000 nm legs, they want to have to ability to rotate it on longer legs as well.

    As mentioned above, the 777-300 had a MZFW range of just 3,600 nm. The 787-10 is at ~ 4,000 nm. If Airbus can get to just under 5,000 nm it would be the best regional machine.
    What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26512
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:44 pm

    Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 79):
    Trent XWB maintenance is done by RR TotalCare, any differences between the engines are not a concern for the customer.

    In terms of spares provisioning, true, but I imagine the TrentXWB-97's hourly rate is higher than just what one would expect from a higher-thrust rating because for RR, spares provisioning is an issue they have admitted and that cost is going to be passed on to the customer.

    Now what that cost would be compared to a OnePoint contract on a comparable GE9X...so might be a non-issue in terms of comparisons.
     
    RIX
    Posts: 1590
    Joined: Thu Aug 03, 2000 4:46 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:44 pm

    Quoting scbriml (Reply 58):
    It's the same nonsense that people talk about A330neo sales coming at the expense of an A350 sale. Guess what? Airbus really doesn't care because every A330 or A350 sale is one less 787 or 777 sale Boeing will make. Delta Air Lines.

    Speaking of nonsense: unlike A or B fanboys here, the A and B themselves don't care about decreasing each other's sales. They care about increasing their own. Preferably without having to design overlapping / competing airframes.
     
    User avatar
    KarelXWB
    Moderator
    Topic Author
    Posts: 26968
    Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 3:50 pm

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 48):
    I personally believe that those don't need the 779 range will want the A351 already. Don't see a great demand for an immediate A350-1100. Late next decade I do.

    I believe you meant to say 'don't need the 779 capacity' instead of range, because B779 and A35K have similar range capabilities.

    The way I see it Airbus would sell the A350-1000 and A350-1100 the same way Boeing sells the 787-9 and 787-10 combination: the smaller jet for range and the larger jet for capacity.

    The benefits may be clear: the larger jet with crippled range won't canalize sales for the smaller jet with additional range, and avoids direct competition with 777-9 above.
    What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
     
    User avatar
    KarelXWB
    Moderator
    Topic Author
    Posts: 26968
    Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:07 pm

    Quoting ap305 (Reply 66):
    According to that article Leahy also states that the aircraft will have more capacity than the 777-9x

    You can't really make the A350 bigger than the 777-9. At 74 meters the A350-1000 can only be stretched for another 5-6 meters as it cannot be longer than 80 meters. The fuselage however remains narrower than the 777.

    The only way to offer more capacity is by going 10-abreast in economy class. Let's see if they go down that road.

    Quoting Ruscoe (Reply 28):
    In addition the XWB-97 is an unknown quantity at this time, regarding performance, and time on wing. (I would be more concerned with the latter).

    Unknown quantity for us perhaps, not for Rolls-Royce and Airbus: the -97 currently flies on the A380 testbed.

    [Edited 2016-02-17 08:18:36]
    What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
     
    Aviaponcho
    Posts: 836
    Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 12:13 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:19 pm

    The 80*80 box is a thing of the past
    The FAA and the EASA are looking a reducing separations for each size of airplane
    Basically on runways and taxyways you will gain a couple of m free ... For instance the A350 will be able to go farther than 64 m wing span
    And i guess the 777-9 will fold/unfold it's wing on the taxyways...
     
    User avatar
    KarelXWB
    Moderator
    Topic Author
    Posts: 26968
    Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:26 pm

    Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 85):
    For instance the A350 will be able to go farther than 64 m wing span

    That would however make the A350 stretch a code F airplane, like the A380. If anything I believe Airbus will want to have it fitted at existing code E gates, like the 777.

    [Edited 2016-02-17 08:28:40]
    What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
     
    User avatar
    Erebus
    Posts: 1061
    Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:35 pm

    Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 84):
    You can't really make the A350 bigger than the 777-9. At 74 meters the A350-1000 can only be stretched for another 5-6 meters as it cannot be longer than 80 meters.

    At ~80m, you have a pretty voluminous belly hold. Perhaps they can move some of the amenities like toilets below deck in favour of more seats on the main deck like LH's A346s.
     
    User avatar
    HALtheAI
    Posts: 294
    Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:30 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:42 pm

    Quoting RIX (Reply 82):
    Speaking of nonsense: unlike A or B fanboys here, the A and B themselves don't care about decreasing each other's sales. They care about increasing their own. Preferably without having to design overlapping / competing airframes.

    Can you please explain the business case for the 747-8 then? Don't forget to take into account that Boeing had been stating in the years after the A380 program launch that the market for VLAs was tiny.
     
    User avatar
    speedbored
    Posts: 2207
    Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:49 pm

    Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 84):
    You can't really make the A350 bigger than the 777-9. At 74 meters the A350-1000 can only be stretched for another 5-6 meters as it cannot be longer than 80 meters. The fuselage however remains narrower than the 777.
    The only way to offer more capacity is by going 10-abreast in economy class. Let's see if they go down that road.

    Well the 779 is supposed to end up just over 3m short of the 80m box limit so Airbus ought to be able to make a -11 a bit longer, if they really want to, and squeeze in a few more rows of seats.

    But isn't the 779 capacity limited by the number of exits, rather than by available space? If Airbus make a -1100 with 5 exit doors each side, they would be able to claim a higher capacity, even if only on paper  
     
    User avatar
    speedbored
    Posts: 2207
    Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 4:52 pm

    Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 86):
    That would however make the A350 stretch a code F airplane, like the A380. If anything I believe Airbus will want to have it fitted at existing code E gates, like the 777.

    Maybe they will go for folding wingtips as well.

    I seem to remember reading a thread last year about an Airbus patent for a pretty clever folding wingtip mechanism.
     
    Egerton
    Posts: 864
    Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:14 pm

    We already know as of 16th February 2016 that RR is offering an Extra Performance version of its Trent XWB 84 with EIS in Q4 2019. This will feature a 1% improvement in fuel consumption.

    http://www.rolls-royce.com/media/pre...re-airlines-as-first-customer.aspx

    We already know that RR is well forward with is 'plastic' fan, which will (together with its containment) be lighter that the hollow titanium RR fans currently in service.

    My guess is that this new fan will pass more air than the current models, whilst spinning at lower speeds. Why? Because each aerofoil will be 'thinner' thus causing less obstruction to the airflow. A slightly larger diameter fan might be possible under the existing wing, thus improving sfc even further, and improving the engine-out margins for hot or high.

    Thus in my view RR already have the technology in place to do a Trent XWB 97+ which will be all that is necessary for a potential A350-1000+ conceived as being slightly below the 777-9 in terms of payload-range. This -1000+ would address 80-90% of the heavy twin airline market, and so sell well against the 777-9.

    New customers for the 777-8 are surely non-starters for all practical purposes, no it does not even get onto the racecourse. The A350-900 Extra Long Haul with its Singapore Airlines treatment yet to be applied to the A350-1000 makes the -8 and its long timescale a lost bet.

    I have not been backward in suggesting that owing to the pure bad luck of low oil prices, the money already expended on the 777-9 (optimised at a niche of only 10-20% of the heavy twin market) has already disappeared into this (now) black hole of a project. The three partners, Boeing, GE and the ME3 need in my opinion need to review their situation, like Scrooge was want to do, before benefiting the black hole with further largess.
     
    tortugamon
    Posts: 6795
    Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:28 pm

    So the 779 is only going to be an ME3 machine and those orders are largely in-hand...yet Airbus wants a me-too version? This stretch doesn't fit with the rhetoric.

    Quoting PhoenixVIP (Reply 55):
    Current wing and PIP XWB-97 for 7500 nautical miles at full payload.

    Why does an A350-1100 stretch lose less range vs the A351 than the 78X loses vs the 789?

    Quoting PhoenixVIP (Reply 55):
    Like the 787-10 that most posters fail to mention.

    The 78X is near the middle of the widebody market slightly above the best selling regional widebody aircraft of all time. The A350-1100 is above the 773.

    Quoting ap305 (Reply 66):
    According to that article Leahy also states that the aircraft will have more capacity than the 777-9x

    I do not believe that as it would have to go past 80m and a full stretch to achieve that. It will already need an additional door as is.

    Quoting enzo011 (Reply 73):
    And if the airline decided on either the A35K or the new A350 stretch, it is a sale from the 779

    So the 779 takes orders from an A380 but an A350 stretch would only take orders from the 779? Some very twisted logic there. Lets try to remain objective.

    Quoting rheinwaldner (Reply 75):
    So you are saying there is also no great demand for the 777-9 either? For sure the 777-9 and the A350-1100 would share and cover any demand there is.

    I meant to say 'need' instead of 'demand'. Outside of a couple key players, I don't think the 77W replacement market has really picked up yet and won't do so for another 10 years and the A380 replacement market will be around then as well. And most importantly I think Airbus can profitably sell every A350 production position before 2025 without spending billions to add this stretch before then.

    Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 77):
    The provision of spare engines is included in RR TC agreements so it's largely immaterial that the 84k/97k+ aren't the same.
    Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 79):
    Trent XWB maintenance is done by RR TotalCare, any differences between the engines are not a concern for the customer.
    Also note, Trent XWB-84 and XWB-97 are the same family with 80% commonality. They are not completely different as you claim.

    The cost of duplicate spares will have to be paid for somewhere. Maybe the TC agreement has a higher rate. The redundancy costs money and I don't think RR is going to just eat it.

    Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 83):
    The way I see it Airbus would sell the A350-1000 and A350-1100 the same way Boeing sells the 787-9 and 787-10 combination: the smaller jet for range and the larger jet for capacity.
    The benefits may be clear: the larger jet with crippled range won't canalize sales for the smaller jet with additional range, and avoids direct competition with 777-9 above.

    The 779 only shows its value on long missions with lots of seat demand and cargo. By definition this value is reduced on shorter missions, and it is my belief that the A351, being cheaper as well, will be able to firmly compete against the 779 on these RFPs as is. Hence I do not see that many new orders for the A350 as a result of this stretch.

    Quoting Aviaponcho (Reply 85):
    The 80*80 box is a thing of the past

    Agreed. Airports will adapt. This isn't going to be a mainstream aircraft anyway.

    tortugamon
     
    User avatar
    seahawk
    Posts: 8938
    Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:37 pm

    Quoting Egerton (Reply 91):
    My guess is that this new fan will pass more air than the current models, whilst spinning at lower speeds. Why? Because each aerofoil will be 'thinner' thus causing less obstruction to the airflow. A slightly larger diameter fan might be possible under the existing wing, thus improving sfc even further, and improving the engine-out margins for hot or high.

    On the 3 shaft design fan speed the fan is still limited by the LPT speed. And afaik this is already at the limit for the XWB. You can not go slower without losing efficiency, which means you can not use a larger fan without having it turn faster, but the fan already turns faster on the 97 version.
     
    User avatar
    Erebus
    Posts: 1061
    Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 2:40 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:51 pm

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 92):
    Maybe the TC agreement has a higher rate

    Can you be a little more specific here. Higher rate than what exactly?
     
    User avatar
    kelvin933
    Posts: 451
    Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2014 9:20 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:55 pm

    http://airinsight.com/2015/10/26/airbus-new-winglet-patent/

    Quoting speedbored (Reply 90):
    I seem to remember reading a thread last year about an Airbus patent for a pretty clever folding wingtip mechanism.

    Was it the fold down wingtip patent ?

    http://airinsight.com/2015/10/26/airbus-new-winglet-patent/
    “Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.”
     
    Chaostheory
    Posts: 1134
    Joined: Wed Mar 06, 2013 2:09 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 5:56 pm

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 92):
    The cost of duplicate spares will have to be paid for somewhere. Maybe the TC agreement has a higher rate. The redundancy costs money and I don't think RR is going to just eat it.

    It's the core where the difference lies. If there is something wrong with the core, the airline won't attempt the repair. They'll pull the engine off and replace it and let RR take care of any core module swaps/repairs.

    As I said, the higher maintenance burden will be borne by RR/OEM. That is no different from current practices where the OEMs charge more for higher rated engines. I've mentioned before how the maintenance costs on a Trent 895 rated at 93.4k are a whopping 30% or so higher than the Trent 892 at 92k.

    It's worth keeping in mind that of the airlines that ordered/operated the 777-200/ER, most went on to order/operate the -200LR/300ER. Off the top of my head, United, El Al, Al Italia, Asiana and Aeromexico didn't. That's potentially 30-60 orders Boeing missed out on by switching to the larger GE-90. Factor in that Boeing has been selling the 200LR/300ER for 15 years and the flexible engine maintenance contracts available now are a world away from the engine MRO options of that era.

    *I'm aware that the -300ER is a single stretch. I've used it as an example of where the stretch platform's engine is a huge change from the base. Just for those arguing the toss that the engine logistics would pose a hindrance.
     
    tortugamon
    Posts: 6795
    Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 6:37 pm

    Quoting speedbored (Reply 89):
    But isn't the 779 capacity limited by the number of exits, rather than by available space? If Airbus make a -1100 with 5 exit doors each side, they would be able to claim a higher capacity, even if only on paper  

    The 779 has 5 doors (four Type 1/A and one type C). The A350 only has 4.

    Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 96):
    It's worth keeping in mind that of the airlines that ordered/operated the 777-200/ER, most went on to order/operate the -200LR/300ER. Off the top of my head, United, El Al, Al Italia, Asiana and Aeromexico didn't.

    I think AA and BA heavily resisted buying the 77W because of the engine change. I would add MH and DL to the list where engine differences played a role (for DL its reversed). Some of these came through in the end and even BA said they made a mistake not ordering it earlier but clearly the engine change has a negative impact.

    Quoting Chaostheory (Reply 96):
    Factor in that Boeing has been selling the 200LR/300ER for 15 years and the flexible engine maintenance contracts available now are a world away from the engine MRO options of that era.

    Solid point.

    tortugamon
     
    User avatar
    speedbored
    Posts: 2207
    Joined: Fri Jul 19, 2013 5:14 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 6:48 pm

    Quoting tortugamon (Reply 97):
    The 779 has 5 doors (four Type 1/A and one type C). The A350 only has 4.

    Yes, I'm aware of that, but 5 type As could allow the 350-1100 to squeeze in up to 55 more passengers than the 779.
     
    User avatar
    Stitch
    Posts: 26512
    Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

    A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

    Wed Feb 17, 2016 6:56 pm

    Quoting speedbored (Reply 98):
    Yes, I'm aware of that, but 5 type As could allow the 350-1100 to squeeze in up to 55 more passengers than the 779.

    Not sure they have the floor space for 550 seats, at least in a usable configuration of pitch and width. Type A doors are also heavy (over 500kg). As such, I would not be surprised if Airbus also went with a Type C like the 777-9.
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5
    • 7

    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