Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:03 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 140):
There are operators of the 77W that already exceed 440 seats like NH, AC, AF, etc. A stretch of this size that can't accommodate that number of seats could be an issue.

Only a handful 77W operators have more than 440 seats. Why would Airbus introduce a fifth exit door for just a handful potential customers?

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 140):
I do think launching an A350-1100 now cuts the A351 at its knees when it needs all the support it can get. Upward conversions will happen.

Does the 787-10 cuts the 787-9 at it knees? I already explained why it doesn't: Boeing sells the 787-9 for range and the 787-10 for capacity. I really don't see why a similar A350-1000 / A350-1100 strategy would be different.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 147):
Lets see how much thrust they are going to get out of these XWB engines.

If I'm not mistaken XWB-97 can go up to 103,000 lbf thrust. This will come at the expense of SFC, but can be compensated by further improvements.

[Edited 2016-02-19 01:19:48]
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:30 am

The issue of body weight (and therefore body size) may be relevant when discussing how many humans can be crammed into an aeroplane.

In a search for 'Human body weight', Wiki suggests (in kg):

60.7 Africa
57.7 Asia
70.8 Europe
67.9 Latam & Caribbean
80.7 North America
74.1 Oceana
62.0 Word

With the A350 fuselage, it might well be possible to have 10 Asians per row in comfort, but only 9 per row for Europeans?
By the way, there are marked differences between males and females, and in the UK differences between our 4 nations.

[Edited 2016-02-19 01:31:59]

[Edited 2016-02-19 01:32:43]
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 10:29 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 151):
Does the 787-10 cuts the 787-9 at it knees? I already explained why it doesn't: Boeing sells the 787-9 for range and the 787-10 for capacity. I really don't see why a similar A350-1000 / A350-1100 strategy would be different.

Because it is an Airbus and not a Boeing?
 
TP313
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 10:30 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 151):
Only a handful 77W operators have more than 440 seats. Why would Airbus introduce a fifth exit door for just a handful potential customers?

Don't forget that exit door regulations include rules not only about passenger number but also about cabin length.
It could be (I´m not sure about that) that for a cabin length of, let's say, 60m you have to fit a fifth exit door.
If this is the case a 350 stretch would need that extra door...
 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 10:41 am

Quoting TP313 (Reply 154):
Don't forget that exit door regulations include rules not only about passenger number but also about cabin length.
It could be (I´m not sure about that) that for a cabin length of, let's say, 60m you have to fit a fifth exit door.
If this is the case a 350 stretch would need that extra door...

Going the whole hog to 80m, you need a 9 frame stretch to 79,6m. Problem is that you can only stretch by 4 frames between door 1 and 2 and 3 frames between door 3 and 4 because of the 60ft exit rule. Adding just 2 frames more gets you a fifth door. Might not be worth it. Unless of course airbus is adding the fifth door (Typ C?) anyway even for a 5-7 frame stretch.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 10:46 am

Quoting TP313 (Reply 154):
Don't forget that exit door regulations include rules not only about passenger number but also about cabin length.
It could be (I´m not sure about that) that for a cabin length of, let's say, 60m you have to fit a fifth exit door.
If this is the case a 350 stretch would need that extra door...

True, it was an issue on the A340-600. Airbus designed the -600 with four Type A exit doors and was forced to add a 5th (Type III) door.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...-600-exit-change-proposals-124453/
 
TP313
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 10:48 am

Quoting mat66 (Reply 155):
Going the whole hog to 80m, you need a 9 frame stretch to 79,6m. Problem is that you can only stretch by 4 frames between door 1 and 2 and 3 frames between door 3 and 4 because of the 60ft exit rule. Adding just 2 frames more gets you a fifth door. Might not be worth it. Unless of course airbus is adding the fifth door (Typ C?) anyway even for a 5-7 frame stretch.

From these most recent rumours, I presume they're going for an 8-9 frame stretch, so that rule would imply the addition of a fifth door. I don't know, it depends on whether extra seating space could be found elsewhere to compensate a lost row...

[Edited 2016-02-19 02:56:08]
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 10:55 am

Quoting mat66 (Reply 155):
Might not be worth it. Unless of course airbus is adding the fifth door (Typ C?) anyway even for a 5-7 frame stretch.

As they did on the A340-600 (see article above).

Let's hope they learned from the A340-600. First -600 prototype rolled off the assembly line with only four doors, Airbus was forced to partly redesign the A340 to accommodate a 5th (smaller) door.

Quoting TP313 (Reply 157):
From these most recent rumours, I presume they're going for an 8-9 frame stretch, so that rule would imply the addition of a fifth door.

That depends how Airbus wants to add more seats. As mentioned up-thread, A350 can accommodate 20 additional seats by installing Space Flex cabin options. It's an option, but if Airbus makes it standard on the A350-1100, stretching the fuselage by 2-3 meters to accommodate the remaining 10-20 seats should be enough.
 
dare100em
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 12:17 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 128):
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 151):
Does the 787-10 cuts the 787-9 at it knees? I already explained why it doesn't: Boeing sells the 787-9 for range and the 787-10 for capacity. I really don't see why a similar A350-1000 / A350-1100 strategy would be different.
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 158):
That depends how Airbus wants to add more seats. As mentioned up-thread, A350 can accommodate 20 additional seats by installing Space Flex cabin options. It's an option, but if Airbus makes it standard on the A350-1100, stretching the fuselage by 2-3 meters to accommodate the remaining 10-20 seats should be enough.

This is all fine and one likes to agree to all that. Problem is that all what we are hearing out of Airbus doesen't go in that direction. Even F.B. said things like "[...] it will be essentially a clean-sheet [...]" ... "slightly above the 777-9" ... "[...] we won't call it A350-1100". All that doesen't sound like a simple stretch of 5 frames in the 787-10 style.

I think Airbus has posponed the A380neo for quite a while. And with that in mind and the ressources available soon - A320neo and A350-1000 done from design point - it looks for me they tend to do much more than a simple stretch. We'll see soon enough.
 
TP313
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 12:27 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 155):
Problem is that you can only stretch by 4 frames between door 1 and 2 and 3 frames between door 3 and 4 because of the 60ft exit rule.
Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 158):
That depends how Airbus wants to add more seats. As mentioned up-thread, A350 can accommodate 20 additional seats by installing Space Flex cabin options. It's an option, but if Airbus makes it standard on the A350-1100, stretching the fuselage by 2-3 meters to accommodate the remaining 10-20 seats should be enough.

After all this exit door discussion, I changed my opinion: the stretch will be 6-7 frames maximum (4.5 m max.).
By the way, it's just enough to fit another 4 LD3.

This will lower somewhat the thrust requirements for the -1100 by about 2000 lb.
Still uncertain that it makes RR's job any easier...
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1749
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 12:31 pm

Quoting dare100em (Reply 159):
it will be essentially a clean-sheet

Clearly this in inconsistent with the OP:

"Airbus Group SE expects to soon decide on whether to build a bigger variant of its A350 jet

Although they could do a simple stretch for regional applications quickly and a clean sheet more capable solution later.
 
dare100em
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 12:49 pm

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 161):
Clearly this in inconsistent with the OP:

"Airbus Group SE expects to soon decide on whether to build a bigger variant of its A350 jet

Although they could do a simple stretch for regional applications quickly and a clean sheet more capable solution later.

Okay I admit it's not yet defined. We'll see what comes out of it but still a simple stretch is IMO not very likely from all the statements recently.

"The aircraft, a longer version of the A350-1000, itself already a so-called stretch model, would be just four seats shy of 400 in a three-class configuration, large enough to take on the biggest 777-9 planned by Boeing, Airbus said Tuesday at a briefing in Paris."


http://www.chinaaviationdaily.com/news/50/50221.html

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...a350-able-to-take-on-boeing-s-777x

http://bloga350.blogspot.de/2015/12/stretched-a350-1000-would-be.html
 
Bambel
Posts: 133
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2015 8:38 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:03 pm

http://bloga350.blogspot.de/2015/12/stretched-a350-1000-would-be.html

“We think we could come up with a very good airplane,” he said, adding that – in comparison with the 777X – it would be “essentially clean-sheet”.

From my understanding the "essentially clean-sheet" is not meant in a way that the A350-1100 would be "like a clean-sheet" compared to the A350-1000 but compared to the 777X.

b.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 1:13 pm

Quoting dare100em (Reply 159):
Problem is that all what we are hearing out of Airbus doesen't go in that direction. Even F.B. said things like "[...] it will be essentially a clean-sheet [...]" ... "slightly above the 777-9" ... "[...] we won't call it A350-1100". All that doesen't sound like a simple stretch of 5 frames in the 787-10 style.

They say a lot of things at management level. I cannot see them spending billions into a new jetliner in a fragmented market. We already have A359, 78X, A35K, 778 and 779 in the 300-400 seat segment.

In addition to the 80x80 box discussion we had above, making too much changes will require significant adjustments to assembly and transportation. The fuselage might not fit inside the Beluga, for example. While there are alternatives like road transport, that's a lot of effort for a relative small market.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:05 pm

Quoting Bambel (Reply 163):
From my understanding the "essentially clean-sheet" is not meant in a way that the A350-1100 would be "like a clean-sheet" compared to the A350-1000 but compared to the 777X.

  
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20124
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:15 pm

Quoting Bambel (Reply 163):
From my understanding the "essentially clean-sheet" is not meant in a way that the A350-1100 would be "like a clean-sheet" compared to the A350-1000 but compared to the 777X.

Agreed.

It should also not be forgotten that Bregier is not a native English speaker. His English is a lot better than my French, but some subtle nuances may be 'lost in translation'.
 
morrisond
Posts: 3497
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 12:22 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:15 pm

If Airbus is thinking Clean Sheet - they are thinking exactly what I though Boeing should have done instead of X'ing the 777.

They should have started with the 787 just like they started with 767 to make the 777. This would have been a lot lighter approach than starting with the 777.

Take the 787 - put an 11W Oval fuselage (787 nose and upsized systems) on it and a new wing to give you the lift you need, your base length (70M) would be 773 size and your stretch (80M) plus 60-90 more seats more - getting comfortably into the 450 seat range, or 750 for Air Canada.....I'm from Canada and hate what AC is doing with seating.

Then you would have 781 at 320 - 787XL-8 at 375ish and 787XL-9 at 450ish. The 787-10 will get better over time and by the Mid 2020's should be a 7500nm range frame

If Airbus does do an XL 351 - maybe they are thinking of wider fuselage XLW instead of longer, it will give the 777X fits as I'm sure it will be lighter - but it also will put a nail in the A380.

But maybe that is part of Airbus's calculus - instead of putting more money into A380 put a bullet in it after they have completed there existing orders and take the funds and make an XLW 350 just like Boeing should have done.

Modern wings and 120-130,000 Thrust per engine twins give you all the power to lift 450ish passengers in a 3 class layout. No need for 4 engines.
 
dare100em
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 2:40 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 164):
In addition to the 80x80 box discussion we had above, making too much changes will require significant adjustments to assembly and transportation. The fuselage might not fit inside the Beluga, for example. While there are alternatives like road transport, that's a lot of effort for a relative small market.

To make it clear, I absolutely don't think they'll build a clean-sheet e.g. 11-abreast super-TWIN.

No question for example the fuse is fixed! I just think that odds are VERY high that it will not be a simple 5-6 frames stretch + a few tonns MTOW increase.

They are talking about 396 seats in a 3-class outfit and capabilities not fare from the 777-9 and - in comparison to the 77X - "essentially a clean-sheet". That's not a simple stretch with less range.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 3:23 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 140):
I don't see production going past 14/month and I think the A359/A351 can handle that with ease.
Quoting tortugamon (Reply 143):
I don't think that will happen in the midterm future. 13/month is already a phenomenally high rate for a widebody aircraft and I just don't think the vendors will support a 38% increase above that.

I'm not convinced they need to go above 13 per month. Remember, 10 per month was supposed to support three family members: -800, -900 and -1000. Without the -800, there should be enough room for -900, -1000 and -1100.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Fri Feb 19, 2016 9:22 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 151):
Only a handful 77W operators have more than 440 seats. Why would Airbus introduce a fifth exit door for just a handful potential customers?

Boeing felt the need. Not sure if it was for these 5 customers or it would be for the distance from the door thing. The trend has been going toward more seats so I am not sure Airbus would want to build in a barrier that would prevent sales.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 151):
Does the 787-10 cuts the 787-9 at it knees? I already explained why it doesn't: Boeing sells the 787-9 for range and the 787-10 for capacity. I really don't see why a similar A350-1000 / A350-1100 strategy would be different.

I think we just have two different opinions on the matter. As I said above I don't think people are going to buy the 779 solely for its size. I think they will want the combo of size/payload range and if they don't need that payload/range then I think they will be ordering the A351 anyway. So essentially an A350-1100 will split the orders that the A351 would have gained and I actually do think some A351 customers will swap up in the near future if Airbus offers it with a 2021 EIS. Surely there will be some orders at the expense of the 779 - certainly - I just don't think it will be that many. Now if Airbus can make a 779 that can have the same payload/range curve as the 779 that is another story but I don't think they will do that.

I do think the 78X will generate more new unique sales as I don't think the 789 competes with the A351 like the 78X can and I do think there are a decent number of A330/77E/A343 operators who are looking for a capacity increase (which they wouldn't get with a 789 but do get with a 78X). I think there are far fewer 77W operators who are definitely looking for a size increase.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 151):
If I'm not mistaken XWB-97 can go up to 103,000 lbf thrust. This will come at the expense of SFC, but can be compensated by further improvements.

Ok, cool. Should be enough for a simple stretch.

Quoting Egerton (Reply 152):
With the A350 fuselage, it might well be possible to have 10 Asians per row in comfort, but only 9 per row for Europeans?

I think the amount of personal space people feel comfortable in does change by country. Americans/Europeans have different comfort levels than Asians/Africans do. At least that has been my experience.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 158):
First -600 prototype rolled off the assembly line with only four doors,

Ha! Funny stuff. Hadn't heard that. Interesting.

Quoting TP313 (Reply 160):
After all this exit door discussion, I changed my opinion: the stretch will be 6-7 frames maximum (4.5 m max.).
By the way, it's just enough to fit another 4 LD3.

That definitely sounds like it would be smaller than the 779.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 170):
I'm not convinced they need to go above 13 per month. Remember, 10 per month was supposed to support three family members: -800, -900 and -1000. Without the -800, there should be enough room for -900, -1000 and -1100.

Agreed. 13 of these aircraft would be a remarkable achievement and I think that Airbus is very focused on not increasing a rate that they don't think is sustainable.


tortugamon
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 10:51 am

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 169):
I think the amount of personal space people feel comfortable in does change by country. Americans/Europeans have different comfort levels than Asians/Africans do. At least that has been my experience.

Thanks tortugamon. Whist you may well be correct, it was not the point I was seeking to make in reply 151, which was:

With the A350 fuselage it might well be possible to have 10 Asians per row in comfort, but only 9 per row for Europeans?

Let us consider 'comfort' from an Asian and European passenger viewpoint?

If there was a A350 passenger cabin simulator with the same simulations of motion and view etc as a flight simulator gives pilots, a statistically significant number of passengers could be given 12 hour simulated flight experiences. One group of passengers would be European with 9 abreast, the other group being Asean with 10 abreast. If all the other things were the same, it should be possible to assess the perceived 'comfort' of each of the two passenger groups. Conclusions could then be drawn, and then be commercialised.

I wonder why such a passenger cabin simulator has not already been built?

My point is that airlines might be best not to think in terms of what they (the airlines) think about comfort, but what their passengers think about comfort. Sorry to be a pedant. But whilst every conceivable issue is usually considered and researched in designing passenger aeroplanes, the same seems not yet to be true about the passenger experience of comfort. Amazing really, that this is all still subjective.

[Edited 2016-02-20 02:57:50]
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20124
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 11:40 am

Quoting Egerton (Reply 170):
My point is that airlines might be best not to think in terms of what they (the airlines) think about comfort, but what their passengers think about comfort.

Ha ha, good luck with that! If you want more comfort, you pay the big bucks for a seat closer to the front. End of. Has always been the case, will always be the case.

Quoting Egerton (Reply 170):
Amazing really, that this is all still subjective.

But it's not. The airlines don't need any fancy mock-ups or a lot of research to know that everyone would like more space. All they do is provide what people are prepared to pay for and put up with. Not a square inch more. It's all about the revenue, not how comfortable the customers are.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:32 pm

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 169):
Boeing felt the need. Not sure if it was for these 5 customers or it would be for the distance from the door thing.

I don't know the reason. However:

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 169):
The trend has been going toward more seats

And yet Boeing decided to replace one Type A door by a smaller Type III door. Therefore maximum exit limit goes down from 550 on the 77W to 475 passengers on the 777-9.

Quoting tortugamon (Reply 169):
I am not sure Airbus would want to build in a barrier that would prevent sales.

It's a trade-off. Either add an additional door and increase airframe weight, or ditch the 5th door and loose a few customer that need 35 additional seats (475 - 440).

And remember, with one additional door, you also lose one row economy seats.

On the flip side, given the 35 tonne weight delta between the A35K and B779, Airbus has a large playing field regarding weight increase.
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 2:36 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 171):

Thanks. Business people think in one of two different ways.
1. The self loading cargo is a damn nuisance - they get in the way of our smooth running of the business.
2. The customer is King, they are the purpose of our existence.
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 20124
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:23 pm

Quoting Egerton (Reply 173):

Or, they say 2 while thinking 1.   

King or not, the customer only gets what they're prepared to pay for.

Most companies list their core values. For an airline, safety should always be number one. Shareholder value will likely be second. Anything about actual customers will be some way down the list.
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 27681
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 3:33 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 174):
Or, they say 2 while thinking 1.    

The customers themselves have voted with their wallets. If they felt 8-abreast A330s*, 9-abreast 787s or 10-abreast 777s were truly unacceptable, they would not patronize them. And yet they fill them an average of 80% or more full every day of the year.



* - I understand that the A330 is generally considered as having acceptable seat comfort, but the 767 has the same comfort with even less seats and yet airlines switched from the 767 to the A330 because that extra seat per row made more revenue even as it impacted customer comfort (having two neighbors to rub shoulders with, instead of just one in the center section).
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 4:20 pm

Quoting Stitch (Reply 175):
The customers themselves have voted with their wallets. If they felt 8-abreast A330s*, 9-abreast 787s or 10-abreast 777s were truly unacceptable, they would not patronize them. And yet they fill them an average of 80% or more full every day of the year.



* - I understand that the A330 is generally considered as having acceptable seat comfort, but the 767 has the same comfort with even less seats and yet airlines switched from the 767 to the A330 because that extra seat per row made more revenue even as it impacted customer comfort (having two neighbors to rub shoulders with, instead of just one in the center section).

I do get what you want to point out with your post, but you surely know that it doesn't apply to Airbus aircraft unless you go charter capacity. If the A330 and the 767 was similar width you would have a point. Just because the A330 can have one more seat per row at a similar comfort level, doesn't make it uncomfortable. Or are you suggesting the 777 at 10-abreast and the A380 main deck are the same because they are both 10-abreast?
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 5:18 pm

Adding Population to my Reply 151:

In a search for 'Human body weight', Wiki suggests (in kg) and suggests for Population (in million). Sorry that this population table is not the best, the data is very unreliable as is the total but perhaps good enough unless you are my sort of pedant:

Kg - Million
60.7 1,111 Africa
57.7 4,372 Asia
70.8 742.5 Europe
67.9 595.0 Latam & Caribbean
80.7 428.7 North America
74.1 38.00 Oceana
62.0 7,400 Word

With the A350 fuselage, it might well be possible to have 10 Asians per row in comfort, but only 9 per row for Europeans?

As I said in Reply 170:

I wonder why such a passenger cabin simulator has not already been built?
My point is that airlines might be best not to think in terms of what they (the airlines) think about comfort, but what their passengers think about comfort. Sorry to be a pedant. But whilst every conceivable issue is usually considered and researched in designing passenger aeroplanes, the same seems not yet to be true about the passenger experience of comfort. Amazing really, that this is all still subjective.


And as I said in my Reply 173:

Business people think in one of two different ways.
1. The self loading cargo is a damn nuisance - they get in the way of our smooth running of the business.
2. The customer is King, they are the purpose of our existence.


And finally:

My conclusion is now that more than half the population of our World is from Asia, and they are smaller than the rest of us. I know not of other Worlds. Being smaller or larger is neither good nor bad, it is just being different.

To me, viewing this 'passenger comfort' thing with subjective non-Asian eyes may be unwise? An A350 might be configured with 10 Asians per row in comfort, but only 9 per row for Europeans for the same comfort.

Hence Airbus are probably ahead of me in suggesting what to a non-Asian seems to be unrealistic seat numbers for their A350-1000+

I hope this helps?
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 6:11 pm

Quoting Egerton (Reply 177):

Should it not be a case, the OEM designs for a certain comfort. If you fall into a category where you will have more space, good for you. If you are fat, tough luck, eat less and hope your seat neighbor isn't fat as well. Your chances will be enhanced if you are in Asia, if you are Europe or North America....hope you don't fly a 10-abreast 777 or 9-abreast 787.
 
747400sp
Posts: 3900
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 6:57 pm

Hello

I am very happily to here read this news, but I am also scared, that an A350 1100, would eat into an A380 sales.
 
WIederling
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 9:41 pm

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 179):

Before any A380 cannibalization it will have the 777X for dinner. "burp".
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 9:54 pm

Quoting WIederling (Reply 180):

Before any A380 cannibalization it will have the 777X for dinner. "burp".

I don't agree, although I recognize your enthusiasm for Airbus products. Just as the 787-10 and A350-900 both have their own markets, I think a A350-1100 and 777-8/9 would have their own markets. I don't think an A350-1100 would have a 777X for dinner. The 777X wingspan should really help it on the longer segments. The A350-1100 likely would perform better on shorter segments.

[Edited 2016-02-20 14:01:21]
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 2752
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 10:26 pm

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 181):
The 777X wingspan should really help it on the longer segments. The A350-1100 likely would perform better on shorter segments.
Quoting WIederling (Reply 180):
Before any A380 cannibalization it will have the 777X for dinner

most strange, we don't even know what the A350-1100 will look like yet, heck we don't even know if it will even be called a A350-1100!

How such assumptions can be made of it beating or not the 777X at this stage is bonkers!
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 10:31 pm

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 182):

How such assumptions can be made of it beating or not the 777X at this stage is bonkers!

I totally agree. It's very premature to talk about the A350-1100 eating the 777x for dinner. We don't even really know what the A350-1100 will be if it happens. We still have a lot of questions out on the 777x either.
 
tortugamon
Posts: 6795
Joined: Tue Apr 09, 2013 11:14 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sat Feb 20, 2016 10:43 pm

Quoting Egerton (Reply 177):
To me, viewing this 'passenger comfort' thing with subjective non-Asian eyes may be unwise?

Its not being non-Asian that is the problem. Its that these figures don't really enter into an airline's decision making which is really what matters. The Japanese are not the largest people in the world yet they have a ton of 2-4-2 787s unlike the rest of the globe. Look at CX, SQ and the Chinese carriers and their resistance to 10-abreast 777s. Just because their passengers are smaller doesn't mean they would accept the changes you suggest.

Also, airlines are not a regional business but a global one. Unless you are inter-Asia you are bound to find a mix of American/Europeans/Asians on any flight so the generalization is not really that helpful.

Quoting 747400sp (Reply 179):
would eat into an A380 sales.

What sales?

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 181):
The A350-1100 likely would perform better on shorter segments.

Agreed.

tortugamon
 
Ruscoe
Posts: 1750
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 1999 5:41 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:34 am

Quoting morrisond (Reply 166):
If Airbus does do an XL 351 - maybe they are thinking of wider fuselage XLW instead of longer,


This is the way to go, give the 350 the fuselage it should always have had.
IMO a totally new 777X competitor will never happen, but if it did, a slightly wider fuselage, to just allow 10 abreast with 17.5" seats and 18" aisles, using 350 systems, and wings, is an obvious way to go and way better than another fuselage extension.
If Airbus can sort out an engine for it, then this could cause the 77X problems, but I except Airbus will concede the large long haul sector to the 777X, and see the real potential of an 1100, as a large medium range aircraft, where I expect there is a market bigger than the large long range which Boeing is persueing.

Ruscoe
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 1:03 am

Personally, I think Airbus should forget about the idea of a A350XWB stretch beyond the A350XWB-1000.

The A350XWB-1000 is perfectly sized for most modern airlines, especially since it is a direct competitor to the 777-300ER. I wouldn't be surprised a lot of airlines are looking at the A35K as a true 747 replacement, especially be able to fly long routes and be compatible with airport infrastructure already used to the 77W.

With the increased emphasis on point-to-point flying, we need a lot less big airliners nowadays, so I'm not sure if Airbus wants to attempt an A350XWB-1100 model.
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14664
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 7:42 am

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 183):

I totally agree. It's very premature to talk about the A350-1100 eating the 777x for dinner.

That is under the underlying assumption that it eats into A380 sales. Any bigger A350 that eats into A380 terrain is bound to eat into 779 terrain, the more dangerous to the A380, the more 779 market it is going to cover.
Unless of course Airbus gives it somehow magically a payload range curve proportional to the A380 and makes it bigger than the 779, I don't see how it can't be much more threatening to A380 sales than 779 sales.
That is like saying the 787-9/10 takes away sales from the 748, but not the 77W/779.
As long as the 779 is at a spot between the A35J and the A380, it will take more from the former.

If the performance guestimatest of what a A35J can do are somewhat close, an airline would have to do a lot of flying between 5000 and 7000nm where the size difference between A35K and 779 really matters to justify a subfleet, that are not A380 territory.

I'd think a bigger A350 would just make a nice complete family of the Airbus line up and therefore help sell the A35J and A35K, because no one would need to buy the 779 for its capacity nor range, just strictly where both are needed.

For an airline that looks at the 777x family the 787 family becomes more attractive as well. And the other way round.

Best regards
Thomas
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1974
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 8:54 am

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 187):
That is under the underlying assumption that it eats into A380 sales. Any bigger A350 that eats into A380 terrain is bound to eat into 779 terrain, the more dangerous to the A380, the more 779 market it is going to cover.
Unless of course Airbus gives it somehow magically a payload range curve proportional to the A380 and makes it bigger than the 779, I don't see how it can't be much more threatening to A380 sales than 779 sales.
That is like saying the 787-9/10 takes away sales from the 748, but not the 77W/779.
As long as the 779 is at a spot between the A35J and the A380, it will take more from the former.

I wish the Airbus side of anet would get it in their heads that the 777X has its market staked out already. Any sales has been predetermined already and a new competitor will not eat into this, but will take away sales it would have gotten in any case (A380 - none) so why would it take sales from the 777X?!               
 
tommy1808
Posts: 14664
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 9:02 am

Quoting enzo011 (Reply 188):
Any sales has been predetermined already and a new competitor will not eat into this, but will take away sales it would have gotten in any case (A380 - none) so why would it take sales from the 777X?!

So, that the order books of both the A350 and the 777x have been stable since the rumor mill about the A35J started in earnest is a coincidence or are there airlines wanting to see what Airbus will offer before committing to one family or the other?

Best regards
Thomas
 
Flyglobal
Posts: 551
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 6:25 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 11:00 am

Quoting enzo011 (Reply 188):
I wish the Airbus side of anet would get it in their heads that the 777X has its market staked out already. Any sales has been predetermined already and a new competitor will not eat into this, but will take away sales it would have gotten in any case (A380 - none) so why would it take sales from the 777X?!

That Airbus is eventually talking about another A350 variant is exactly because there are so few customers that have already decided foe the 777x, but still there are a lot of customers of the 777-300ER which may need new arplanes from 2023 onwards. You are right that the ME Airlines are all said from switching from the ER zo the x, but not all the others with a relatively new ER fleet and still some time to go for a new deciisosn may have an eye what is offered else in this field.

So I can understand that Airbus is not updating the A380 now , but rather tries to capture sales from potential 777x customers.


Flyglobal
 
WIederling
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 11:24 am

Quoting enzo011 (Reply 188):
that the 777X has its market staked out already.

My guess is the large initial commitments came with contract language that allows easy backing out
which would only be prudent after the 787 debacle. ( LH swapped in their 748 options, right?)
i.e. if Boeing can't jump or Airbus tops them significantly the 777X orders could turn into a house of cards.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 12:30 pm

Nobody at Airbus should spent a moment of his time thinking about the influence of a hypothetical A350-1100 on the A380.
The A380 is old news, the cost written off, she lives or dies. The A350 is the future of Airbus wide bodies.
But I anyway thing that the A350 is not hurting the A380 but the 787 and 777.
I expect Airbus doing a smallest change necessary approach to the A350-1100 if it is done now.
The A350-1000 has in build reserves. There is the big MLG of similar dimensions as the 777. The A350 has a big wing with a rather low loading. The wing can be smaller than on the 777-9 as the frame is lighter anyway. The Trent XWB will be pushed to slightly over 100 Klb. The fuselage is stretched to the possible, perhaps all the way to the 80 meters, MTOW is upped 20 metric tons and there will be a bird doing 95% of what the 777-9 is doing, perhaps even less a difference.
You offer the changes for the 350-1100 on a A350-1000LR and you have the serious 777-8 competitor.
The 777 versus A340-500/600 situation turned around. Now the 777X would be the slightly more capable but heavier, less economic frame.
 
Egerton
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 9:50 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 2:04 pm

Quoting mjoelnir (Reply 192):
Now the 777X would be the slightly more capable but heavier, less economic frame. (Than the A350-1000 strech)

Mjoelnir, your Post 192 is spot on.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 2:21 pm

If the A380 stays in its current form the 777x and A350 are going to take most of its orders other than Emirates. The A380 is huge and benefits from low seat mile costs, but if the 777x and A350 bring in newer technology and match or beat its CASM, then the A380 is useless for almost all airlines. Except for a few airlines with extreme capacity demand like Emirates, smaller airplanes are often more desirable since RASM tends to go up with smaller planes and more controlled inventory and capacity. The 350-400 seats on the large twins allow more flexibility and more routes to be served. If the cost is the same to fly 10 weekly 777 or A350 service as it is daily A380 service, almost all airlines prefer the smaller plane and more frequency since it improves flexibility in the operation and increases yields.

Quoting enzo011 (Reply 188):
get it in their heads that the 777X has its market staked out already. Any sales has been predetermined already and a new competitor will not eat into this, but will take away sales it would have gotten in any case (A380 - none) so why would it take sales from the 777X?!               

There are a few of our friends on here that like to predict the death of programs before they have ever flown. I may be guilty of it too, but it certainly is too early to talk about the A350 turning 777x orders into a house of cards or eating the 777x for dinner. The A350 in its present and future forms is a direct competitor to the 777. Competing products can coexist. It is statements like these which don't make much logical sense unless you are a fervent fan of Airbus products:

Quoting WIederling (Reply 191):
i.e. if Boeing can't jump or Airbus tops them significantly the 777X orders could turn into a house of cards.

Too early to say that. There is no real logic into why the A350-1100 would even be superior.
 
B777LRF
Posts: 2885
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 4:23 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 2:49 pm

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 194):
There is no real logic into why the A350-1100 would even be superior.

Weighing 35 tons less does present a rather compelling argument, whether it fits your idea of 'logic' is something else entirely.
 
WIederling
Posts: 10043
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 2:56 pm

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 182):
bonkers!

What's for dinner was about "would an A350-1111 cut into A380 sales".
The menu was:
777X before A380.  
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 3:02 pm

Quoting B777LRF (Reply 195):

Weighing 35 tons less does present a rather compelling argument, whether it fits your idea of 'logic' is something else entirely.

For short to medium haul where heavy payload is not necessary yes, for long haul where more payload is necessary along with the more efficient 777 wing with its bigger wingspan not necessarily.
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 10386
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 3:39 pm

When Airbus says it is essentially a clean sheet. it could easily be a simple stretch of the 1000 as they would claim that the A350 is a clean sheet and the 1100 is not limited in any way by the A350 basis.
 
mjoelnir
Posts: 9652
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 11:06 pm

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1

Sun Feb 21, 2016 3:49 pm

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 194):
If the A380 stays in its current form the 777x and A350 are going to take most of its orders other than Emirates. The A380 is huge and benefits from low seat mile costs, but if the 777x and A350 bring in newer technology and match or beat its CASM, then the A380 is useless for almost all airlines. Except for a few airlines with extreme capacity demand like Emirates, smaller airplanes are often more desirable since RASM tends to go up with smaller planes and more controlled inventory and capacity. The 350-400 seats on the large twins allow more flexibility and more routes to be served. If the cost is the same to fly 10 weekly 777 or A350 service as it is daily A380 service, almost all airlines prefer the smaller plane and more frequency since it improves flexibility in the operation and increases yields.

Than be it and the A380 is dead or perhaps it gets neoed and lives on. But if the 777X is that good it does not need the A350-1100 to kill the A380. The A350-1000/1100 are competing directly with the 777-8/9 and that would be the aim of a hypothetical A350-1100.
As it is the 777-9 is mainly ordered by airlines using also the A380, so it seem they rather complement each other than compete with each other.

Quoting roseflyer (Reply 194):
Quoting WIederling (Reply 191):
i.e. if Boeing can't jump or Airbus tops them significantly the 777X orders could turn into a house of cards.

Too early to say that. There is no real logic into why the A350-1100 would even be superior.

Lighter and more economical at the same range and payload.

Who is online

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