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

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:01 am

Let us continue the discussion here.

A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 1 (by KarelXWB Feb 16 2016 in Civil Aviation)
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

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:03 am

Story is getting more interesting, from Bloomberg:

Quote:
Airbus isn’t interested in swaying the Persian Gulf carriers that have accounted for the bulk of Boeing’s 306 orders for the 777X. “Let’s give up on that. They already won,” Leahy said. “Let’s optimize an airplane for the Uniteds, the British Airways of the world who don’t need all that performance and then come up with a much more efficient airplane.”

Let's see what kind of airplane they will offer at Farnborough...
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2910
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:38 am

Here's the link: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...evamp-on-emirates-capacity-squeeze

...let's avoid turning it into another A380neo thread.  

Looks like Airbus is thinking of their own 787-10: less capable than 779 but more efficient. Not a bad idea. Probably the possibility of this kind of frame is keeping less ULH-heavy airlines from ordering the 779 for now.

This would probably be payload-limited on a lot of flights - say ~9 hour MZFW range?

IMO smart airlines should be expecting belly cargo yield and/or load factor to drop off over the next decade. Though cargo yields are much lower than pax per pound, they're still far in excess of airline marginal cost. We're going to see an explosion of cheap LD3 lift and yields on that cargo will converge toward marginal cost. Currently maindeck freighters still supply most of the cargo lift at, e.g., CX and other airlines with devoted freight arms. But that will become increasingly rare - pure freight ops are continually losing money even with cheap gas. So future cargo yields will be set more by the marginal cost (to airlines) of shipping freight in the hundreds of 787/A350/777X's being produced annually next decade.

If that dynamic works out as I'm supposing it will, then paying a fleet efficiency penalty for cargo revenue will make increasingly less sense. That would favor an A350-1100 over a 779 in the long term.

[Edited 2016-03-02 01:43:28]
 
Millenium
Posts: 154
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:05 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:41 am

Some interesting quotes from Flightglobal:

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...ion-on-demand-for-new-a350-422535/


"“I’m the one that started out with probably the most scepticism of is there really a market for 45 more seats,” Leahy says on the sidelines of the ISTAT Americas conference on 29 February. “Now I think there is some market.”"


"“I’m going to lunch with an airline right now to talk specifically about stretching it,” Leahy says."

And regarding Farnborough:
"“We’ll just say more,” Leahy says. “We might say we’ve talked to the airlines and they don’t think there’s that big of a market there. We might say there is a market and we’re going to launch it before the end of the year.”"

Regards.
Regards
 
scotron11
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:45 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 2):
If that dynamic works out as I'm supposing it will, then paying a fleet efficiency for cargo revenue will make increasingly less sense. That would favor an A350-1100 over a 779 in the long term.

Indeed...as indicated when IAG divested their wet-leased 3x748Fs and are increasingly forging close ties with AY and QR for their freight needs.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:50 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 2):
Looks like Airbus is thinking of their own 787-10: less capable than 779 but more efficient. Not a bad idea. Probably the possibility of this kind of frame is keeping less ULH-heavy airlines from ordering the 779 for now.

Exactly the product I had in mind when starting the previous thread.

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 2):
This would probably be payload-limited on a lot of flights - say ~9 hour MZFW range?

We don't know if Airbus will increase MTOW.

> At 308t MTOW the MZFW range would be ~ 4,100 nm, good for 9 hours.
> At 328t MTOW the MZFW range would be ~ 4,700 nm, good for 10+ hours.

B787-10 comes at ~ 4,100 nm MZFW and has the same MTOW as the smaller 787-9. However, unlike the 787-10, the A350 has room for growth. If they increase MTOW by some 20 tons, it would be an even better regional machine.

For reference, 777-300 (non-ER) had an MZFW range of some 3,600 nm.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
ap305
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 9:58 am

I think what Leahy is suggesting is not a compromise in terms of range but a lack of hot/high performance....If Airbus wants to win orders from the likes of UA and BA the aircraft will have a range that at least allows U.S east coast to Japan and London to Asia non stop.
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
Matt6461
Posts: 2910
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:14 am

Quoting ap305 (Reply 6):

I think what Leahy is suggesting is not a compromise in terms of range but a lack of hot/high performance

These tend to be correlated, no? There are exceptions where only thrust is elevated, not MTOW. But a B779 can probably go further from YVR than from DXB.

Quoting ap305 (Reply 6):
U.S east coast to Japan and London to Asia non stop.

NRT-LHR is a ~12hr flight. If 9-10hrs is MZFW range and ~14 hours pax+bags range, then you block off ~half of cargo space. Belly load factors rarely get 60% anyway so you're not losing a ton of revenue. If a full belly is worth ~10% of trip revenue, your average revenue hit might be only a couple % points.

Meanwhile, if the lighter-better optimized frame has 3-5% lower trip cost than the 779 it's perhaps more profitable than the heavy lifter on NRT-LHR. And of course you're still going to do a lot of shorter flights where payload won't be an issue and trip cost savings are pure profit.

I remember reading somewhere - can't recall offhand - that airlines tend to "over-buy" capability. That fits with the general truth that management ego tends to tip scales towards buying cooler stuff. But the airline industry is becoming more and more pragmatic and data-driven.
 
ZEDZAG
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 3:09 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:14 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 5):
We don't know if Airbus will increase MTOW.

> At 308t MTOW the MZFW range would be ~ 4,100 nm, good for 9 hours.
> At 328t MTOW the MZFW range would be ~ 4,700 nm, good for 10+ hours.

308t is current MTOW of 3510, and what are the values for OEW and MZFW?

Assuming OEW will increase at least 10t for this strech, the MZFW will have to rise the same, if not even more?
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:16 am

Quoting ZEDZAG (Reply 8):
308t is current MTOW of 3510, and what are the values for OEW and MZFW?

A35K OEW is 155t, MZFW range ~ 5,700 nm.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
ap305
Posts: 1501
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2000 4:03 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:26 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 7):

These tend to be correlated, no?

Not necessarily? If there are no tire speed limitations involved, an air frame with relatively higher wing loading and lower thrust can still have a long range. It will just use more runway and have less derates available. The 787-9 for example uses more runway than the a350-900 (and will have more restrictions for hot/high) but is no slouch in terms of range in "normal" conditions.
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
 
ZEDZAG
Posts: 112
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 3:09 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:29 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 9):
MZFW range ~ 5,700 nm.

OK, range at MZFW is 5700 nm, but what is MZFW, 210-215t?
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:50 am

Quoting ZEDZAG (Reply 11):
OK, range at MZFW is 5700 nm, but what is MZFW, 210-215t?

A35K MZFW is 220t.

http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/medi...atibility_Brochure_August_2014.pdf
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

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:52 am

Regarding the 5th exit door we discussed in the previous thread, it seems that option is already available on the A35K.

http://imagr.eu/up/K8hTX_Screenshot_2016-03-02_11-50-34.png
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
JerseyFlyer
Posts: 1415
Joined: Fri May 25, 2007 7:24 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:03 am

Quoting ap305 (Reply 6):
.If Airbus wants to win orders from the likes of UA and BA the aircraft will have a range that at least allows U.S east coast to Japan and London to Asia non stop.

Looks like a perfect replacement for BA 744s used on LHR - JFK
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 2015
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:13 am

Quote:
Airbus isn’t interested in swaying the Persian Gulf carriers that have accounted for the bulk of Boeing’s 306 orders for the 777X. “Let’s give up on that. They already won,” Leahy said. “Let’s optimize an airplane for the Uniteds, the British Airways of the world who don’t need all that performance and then come up with a much more efficient airplane.”

Which is exactly what I said on the other thread, I admit its not rocket science but it still seeems to pass a lot of people by. The fact that the ME3 has comitted 1000% to the 777X allows Airbus to produce an aircraft that will give the rest of the world a seat mile cost advantage over the ME3.

Quoting JerseyFlyer (Reply 14):
Looks like a perfect replacement for BA 744s used on LHR - JFK

A perfect 774 & when the times comes 77W replacement.
BV
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 530
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:51 am

Quoting Millenium (Reply 3):
"“I’m the one that started out with probably the most scepticism of is there really a market for 45 more seats,” Leahy says on the sidelines of the ISTAT Americas conference on 29 February. “Now I think there is some market.”"

Is this the first time, like ever that Leahy has admitted he's wrong and walked back something he said earlier?
 
Asiaflyer
Posts: 873
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:50 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 11:57 am

Filler
filler
filler

[Edited 2016-03-02 03:59:13]
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,
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17772
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:10 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 1):
Let's see what kind of airplane they will offer at Farnborough...

The irony is, a reduced range, higher capacity A350-1100 might be of interest to Emirates for their regional fleet.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 1):
Leahy said. “Let’s optimize an airplane for the Uniteds, the British Airways of the world who don’t need all that performance and then come up with a much more efficient airplane.

Interesting that he mentioned two specific airlines that already have A350-1000s on order.
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.
 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:23 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 13):
Regarding the 5th exit door we discussed in the previous thread, it seems that option is already available on the A35K

Thank you, nice catch. Interesting and it's not over wing but where the bulk of Y seats are (like the 779). Probably intended for airlines with 10 abreast Y.
On the A350-1100 it would still be between door 2 and 3 though, if they do the 9 frame stretch. For no other reason that you want that plane to get airborne somehow. A 4/5 stretch would make no sense and the tail too long.
For a 7 frame 4/3 stretch they probably just keep the option as is.

On another note, I still can't wrap my head around the quote from Brégier that it won't be called A350-1100.
A360-1000? -2000 (so 1990s, hope not)? No clue there, none.  
 
User avatar
scbriml
Posts: 17772
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2003 10:37 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:41 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 19):
On another note, I still can't wrap my head around the quote from Brégier that it won't be called A350-1100.

It will clearly be an A350, but maybe not -1100. Perhaps the A350-1050 or A350-1500? I don't think it's a big deal what it's called.   
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.
 
dare100em
Posts: 275
Joined: Tue Dec 23, 2014 9:31 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:45 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 19):
On another note, I still can't wrap my head around the quote from Brégier that it won't be called A350-1100.
A360-1000? -2000 (so 1990s, hope not)? No clue there, none.

That's indeed very strange. It would not make any sense for a plane the size of the 777-9 but with slightly less capabilities. It's clearly a derivate of the A350. Because of this statement and my missinterpretation of the "essentially clean-sheet" quote from Leahy [it was intented on the 77X, not on the A350 base] i thought they'll chance much more.

However we may read to much into it and they may just call it A350-Max or A350-1000-XLB (extreme long boody) LoL.
 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:52 pm

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 7):
Meanwhile, if the lighter-better optimized frame has 3-5% lower trip cost than the 779 it's perhaps more profitable than the heavy lifter on NRT-LHR

Really just 3-5%? Granted that trip is on the long end of the A350-1100 and I believe you. Would still have thought it's more.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 20):
It will clearly be an A350, but maybe not -1100. Perhaps the A350-1050 or A350-1500? I don't think it's a big deal what it's called.   

Of course it's not. The name could just give us some clue what Airbus wants it to be. We are guessing length, performance, range etc. A small deal maybe  
they could just ad some letters to A350-1000? BFA(irplane)  
 
WIederling
Posts: 8888
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2015 2:15 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 12:56 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 22):
they could just ad some letters to A350-1000? BFA(irplane)

nahh!

A350-2020
 
Murphy is an optimist
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2468
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:02 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 19):
On another note, I still can't wrap my head around the quote from Brégier that it won't be called A350-1100.

That quote was from quite a while back wasn't it?

Could have been he said something:

"IF we do a clean sheet, it won't be A350-1100".


I cannot see any way why they won't name it A35.... L I guess. [why is A350-1000 called A35K? Surely it should be A35J?]
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14133
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:09 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 5):
> At 308t MTOW the MZFW range would be ~ 4,100 nm, good for 9 hours.
> At 328t MTOW the MZFW range would be ~ 4,700 nm, good for 10+ hours.

Work on a fuel burn of around 8t per hour, and a ground speed of 475 kts, that that would be realistic.

http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm262/ferpe_bucket/AirbusA350-1000payload-rangediagram.jpg

I would suggest the range on a A350-1100 would be 7000 nm with passengers only.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 13):
Regarding the 5th exit door we discussed in the previous thread, it seems that option is already available on the A35K.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
mat66
Posts: 307
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 1:12 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:22 pm

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 24):
[why is A350-1000 called A35K? Surely it should be A35J?]

Thank you, sir. I never understood A350K. Really messed up with my OCD
 
 
User avatar
speedygonzales
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2007 5:01 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:25 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 26):
Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 24):
[why is A350-1000 called A35K? Surely it should be A35J?]

Thank you, sir. I never understood A350K. Really messed up with my OCD


K is for kilo.
Ignorance kills. :tombstone:
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8137
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:36 pm

I still wonder why Airbus is pursuing the stretch of the A350XWB beyond the -1000 size. Today's airlines already find the 777-300ER the perfect size of plane to replace the 747-400, and except for the big sale to EK, nobody else has expressed interest on a larger scale to buying the 777-9.

Now, Airbus offering a higher gross weight (HGW) version of the A350XWB-1000 to increase the range to 8,500 nautical miles, that might interest more airlines.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4891
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:41 pm

Quoting dare100em (Reply 21):
Because of this statement and my missinterpretation of the "essentially clean-sheet" quote from Leahy [it was intented on the 77X, not on the A350 base] i thought they'll chance much more.

I don't understand the confusion around this - it can't be compared to the 777X, as Airbus won't be basing anything off of the 777X, so its not a clean sheet with regard to the 777X.

What I think it refers to is Airbus are considering doing another A330/A340 family hook up - the A340ed version of the A350 would retain the fuselage width and infrastructure, while the wings, engines, landing gear etc would be a clean sheet design to optimise the aircraft for its larger role.
 
Amiga500
Posts: 2468
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:22 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 1:47 pm

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 28):
I still wonder why Airbus is pursuing the stretch of the A350XWB beyond the -1000 size. Today's airlines already find the 777-300ER the perfect size of plane to replace the 747-400, and except for the big sale to EK, nobody else has expressed interest on a larger scale to buying the 777-9.

Surely that is why John Leahy is going around the airlines talking to them to try and gauge demand?
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:20 pm

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 1):
Let's see what kind of airplane they will offer at Farnborough...

If they will offer it there already it sure will be very interesting with what kind of variant they will come up with.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 18):
The irony is, a reduced range, higher capacity A350-1100 might be of interest to Emirates for their regional fleet.

That might very well be the case.  .

Quoting scbriml (Reply 20):
It will clearly be an A350, but maybe not -1100. Perhaps the A350-1050 or A350-1500? I don't think it's a big deal what it's called.

To please the Chinese they could call it the A350-1800.  .

Quoting speedygonzales (Reply 27):
K is for kilo.

And kilo stands for 1000.  

[Edited 2016-03-02 06:22:54]
 
User avatar
BoeingVista
Posts: 2015
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:54 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:20 pm

Quoting zeke (Reply 25):
Work on a fuel burn of around 8t per hour, and a ground speed of 475 kts, that that would be realistic.

That fuel burn seems a little high as the A359 burns 5.6t average on a 7.5h sector.
BV
 
User avatar
rotating14
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:54 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:26 pm

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 28):
Now, Airbus offering a higher gross weight (HGW) version of the A350XWB-1000 to increase the range to 8,500 nautical miles, that might interest more airlines.

That won't increase the seat count though. I share your same skepticism about the stretch of the A35K. Beyond the ME3 buying spree, it has sold in Japan and Europe with Qantas taking a hard look at it as well, disqualifying the notion that it is catered to the ME3.

Quote:
“Let’s optimize an airplane for the Uniteds, the British Airways of the world who don’t need all that performance and then come up with a much more efficient airplane.”

As noted further up thread, these two carriers have committed to the A35K AND the 787-10 with United taking delivery of new 77W's this year with rumors of 10 more 77W's being ordered. We know that BA has been quietly shopping around for more lift by showing interest in 2nd hand A380's but the 25 or so need replacing as well. He, Willie Walsh, could take either more 787-10's, A35k's or acquire the 779.

Quoting Amiga500 (Reply 30):
gauge demand?

I think that there's sufficient demand out there for the 400 + seat twin engine aircraft. He 1st refuted the fact (how did the 350 seat market add 45 seats overnight) and is now talking to other airlines about what airlines have interest in. To me it looks like posturing to filibuster any 779 progress, like any salesman would do.
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14133
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 2:32 pm

Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 32):

That fuel burn seems a little high as the A359 burns 5.6t average on a 7.5h sector.

Yes it is high, but that higher fuel burn would be added to the front end of the flight plan, as the weight is reduced to the A359 weight the fuel burn per hr would be similar. The A359 burns less than the A333.

In a real world, you have winds and ATC restrictions which disconnects the a.net virtual reality and what is loaded on an aircraft. 8t per hour is still a tonne an hour less than a 77W. It would probably cost you 250 kg/tonne to carry an extra tonne 7000 nm, that would be around 400 kg/tonne on a 77W.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
User avatar
Stitch
Posts: 26497
Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2005 4:26 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 4:17 pm

Quoting RayChuang (Reply 28):
I still wonder why Airbus is pursuing the stretch of the A350XWB beyond the -1000 size. Today's airlines already find the 777-300ER the perfect size of plane...

The majority of 77W operators are moving from 9-abreast to 10-abreast so the A350-1000 may now be "too small" as a 77W replacement, even though it offers significantly better fuel burn.

Also, I imagine the majority off 77W operators are not using the plane at it's design range (or longer). An A350-1100 that can match a 10-abreast 777-300ER's passenger payload on 90%+ of the missions would be a compelling offer vis-a-vis the 777-9 for such replacements.



Quoting RayChuang (Reply 28):
Now, Airbus offering a higher gross weight (HGW) version of the A350XWB-1000 to increase the range to 8,500 nautical miles, that might interest more airlines.

I am of the belief that market has already purchased the 777-9.



Quoting scbriml (Reply 18):
Interesting that he mentioned two specific airlines that already have A350-1000s on order.

I could see some current A350-1000 customers trading up to the A350-1100.



Quoting scbriml (Reply 18):
The irony is, a reduced range, higher capacity A350-1100 might be of interest to Emirates for their regional fleet.

I expect very much so and might be why the A350 is now back in the running.

[Edited 2016-03-02 08:22:30]
 
User avatar
PW100
Posts: 3928
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2002 9:17 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 4:42 pm

Quoting scbriml (Reply 20):
Quoting mat66 (Reply 19):
On another note, I still can't wrap my head around the quote from Brégier that it won't be called A350-1100.

It will clearly be an A350, but maybe not -1100. Perhaps the A350-1050 or A350-1500? I don't think it's a big deal what it's call

If it's a clean sheet, then obvioulsy A360 (-800/900) would be appropriate.

But I think an A350 derivative is more likely. So I'll put my money on A351-800/900. (like A321-200 . . . ).
Immigration officer: "What's the purpose of your visit to the USA?" Spotter: "Shooting airliners with my Canon!"
 
SelseyBill
Posts: 710
Joined: Wed Jul 17, 2013 7:38 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 6:13 pm

Quoting mat66 (Reply 19):
head around the quote from Brégier that it won't be called A350-1100.
A360-1000? -2000 (so 1990s, hope not)? No clue there, none

I've heard people working in central England not far from a major propulsion manufactory call it the '352', suggesting it might be labelled the A350-2000......
 
User avatar
rotating14
Posts: 1391
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2012 11:54 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Wed Mar 02, 2016 8:45 pm

I'm not sure if this has any validity but I thought I'd share it with the rest of the world.


http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/n...a350-1000-stretch-a-threat-to.html

Quote:
Leahy’s statements hint at a shifting attitude at the highest level of Airbus leadership. Just three weeks ago Sean Black, senior director of the A350 U.S. program, was circumspect about a possible A350 stretch, speaking at the Pacific Northwest Aerospace Alliance annual conference in Lynnwood.
“These are purely engineering trade studies,” Black said. “There are no plans within Airbus to do anything further than the base 1000.”
 
tommy1808
Posts: 11252
Joined: Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:24 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 6:40 am

Quoting mat66 (Reply 22):
Really just 3-5%? Granted that trip is on the long end of the A350-1100 and I believe you.

Just 3 to 5% on fuel burn I can imagine, but hardly on trip cost. A 10+% lighter frame would save just those 10+% on many fees, maintenance cost should be about that much cheaper.

I think he just mentioned that it needs to have just 3 to 5% lower trip cost to make up for the payload shortfall on that distance.

Best regards
Thomas
This Singature is a safe space......
 
User avatar
zeke
Posts: 14133
Joined: Thu Dec 14, 2006 1:42 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 7:25 am

Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 39):
Just 3 to 5% on fuel burn I can imagine, but hardly on trip cost. A 10+% lighter frame would save just those 10+% on many fees, maintenance cost should be about that much cheaper.

Just ignore the numbers, the guy has no idea what he on about.
Human rights lawyers are "ambulance chasers of the very worst kind.'" - Sky News
 
TP313
Posts: 286
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2001 12:37 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:34 am

Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
The majority of 77W operators are moving from 9-abreast to 10-abreast so the A350-1000 may now be "too small" as a 77W replacement, even though it offers significantly better fuel burn.

This quote is the most relevant in this thread in what concerns the 350-1100 (or whatever) business case. Airbus is going for the 77W replacement market, the whole of it, not just the 9-abreast operators.

The problem for Boeing in this market is that the 777-9 is best suited for 744 operators or 77W operators that are looking for growth, which is still a substantial market, but responding to the 1100 with a 777-10 strech will not address the 77W replacement market at all.

This is, IMO, the Airbus gamble with the 350-1100. If it "pays" or not remains to be seen...
 
scotron11
Posts: 1432
Joined: Tue Feb 10, 2004 4:54 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 8:59 am

Quoting TP313 (Reply 41):
The problem for Boeing in this market is that the 777-9 is best suited for 744 operators or 77W operators that are looking for growth, which is still a substantial market, but responding to the 1100 with a 777-10 strech will not address the 77W replacement market at all.

Which airline has a substantial fleet of 77W and 744s that want to upgauge to a 779? The two carriers with a "sizeable 744" fleet is BA and UA.......for which both have stated the current 35J is their replacement!
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2910
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:15 am

Quoting mat66 (Reply 22):
Really just 3-5%? Granted that trip is on the long end of the A350-1100 and I believe you. Would still have thought it's more.
Quoting tommy1808 (Reply 39):
Quoting mat66 (Reply 22):
Really just 3-5%? Granted that trip is on the long end of the A350-1100 and I believe you.

Just 3 to 5% on fuel burn I can imagine, but hardly on trip cost. A 10+% lighter frame would save just those 10+% on many fees, maintenance cost should be about that much cheaper.

No I meant overall DOC trip cost, capital inclusive. And I actually think 5% would be pretty high. I doubt that the 787-10 beats the A359 by that much on DOC trip cost, for example.

The fact is that 5% overall DOC advantage is a very, very big accomplishment for two aircraft of similar capacity and technology level. With airline profit margins rarely above 10%, that's a 50% increase in profit margin. Very few airlines would buy X if Y were 5% better. According to Bjorn/Ferpe's analysis at Leeham, the A350-1000, for example, has only 4-7% lower DOC per seat than the 77W, depending on the price of gas. http://leehamnews.com/2014/12/17/a38...ep-analysis-of-its-competitivness/ (The story is behind a paywall but others like KarelXWB can verify accuracy).

Per that same story, Bjorn/Ferpe estimates that fees escalate with the cube root of MTOW - a lot of overflight expense varies not at all with size/capacity. Cube root of 775/679 is only 1.045 - 4% savings on fees if MTOW unchanged.
Engine maintenance is related to total thrust; A350-1100 would be at least ~100k thrust with an MTOW bump, no more than ~5% less than 777-9.

[Edited 2016-03-03 01:23:30]
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2910
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:16 am

Quoting zeke (Reply 40):
Just ignore the numbers, the guy has no idea what he [sic] on about.

I wish we had an eyeroll emoji.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:39 am

Quoting scbriml (Reply 18):
The irony is, a reduced range, higher capacity A350-1100 might be of interest to Emirates for their regional fleet.
Quoting Stitch (Reply 35):
I expect very much so and might be why the A350 is now back in the running.

That depends.

If Airbus does not increase the MTOW, this A350-1100 would have about the same MZFW range as the 787-10. And we know Emirates wants more power out of the 787-10.

If Airbus increase the MTOW, it might just be enough to satisfy Emirates.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
Matt6461
Posts: 2910
Joined: Wed Oct 16, 2013 9:36 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:51 am

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 45):
If Airbus increase the MTOW, it might just be enough to satisfy Emirates.

But didn't Leahy concede the ME3 market as lost?

EK's 78X/A359 order is a "regional" order targeted at smaller destinations. Even EK can't fly 350+ seats everywhere; it wants to expand its network to serve smaller points that it currently avoids. There are many of these cities right now.

I see this plane more as Leahy says he sees it: targeted at airlines like UA/BA that have shorter, high-capacity routes that don't need an 8,000nm+ monster. Boeing and Airbus project TATL to be bigger than the China-USA even in 2034, so this is still a very big market. Then you have South Asia-Europe, Aus/NZ-Asia, USA-SouthAmerica. TPAC and ME3 routes are big markets but there's plenty of flying within 78X range.
 
User avatar
moo
Posts: 4891
Joined: Sun May 13, 2007 2:27 am

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:02 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 46):
But didn't Leahy concede the ME3 market as lost?

For a particular highly optimised product, yes - but that doesn't mean he can't push a slight spec change in order to make a -1100 interesting to Emirates for a perceived hole in their capability.

The Emirates market was lost when Airbus refused to heavily optimise the A350 for Emirates - Emirates dropped the A350 order (which was still the best of breed on the market at the time of ordering) when Boeing agreed to heavily optimise the 777X for them.

Leahy just acknowledges this. Airbus doesn't have to move the A350-1100 in one specific direction for one customer group because that boat has sailed (twice, by my count) - but it doesnt mean that that customer group doesn't have a capability gap for a more generic product either.
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Moderator
Topic Author
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:18 am

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 7):
I remember reading somewhere - can't recall offhand - that airlines tend to "over-buy" capability.

Many airlines rotate aircraft into their network. So you don't buy an aircraft to run just 3,000 legs, you want the aircraft to be capable of running 4,000 nm and 5,000 nm legs as well. It's just one of the reasons why the 777 non-ER family did not sell well.

Several years ago we had Lufthansa complaining about these new long-haul aircraft carrying too much weight because the airframes are being designed to fly 7,000 nm legs. Yet LH selected the A350-900 over the 787-10. There are more examples. Airlines quite often say they want to have optimized planes, though they are not putting their money where they mouth is.

Phil Seymour, IBA Group, has the following to say about the 787-10:

Quote:
Seymour said the 787-10 may sell reasonably well but have a small customer base, while the 787-8 sales may be slowing, the customer base will be broader.

Ref http://leehamnews.com/2016/02/29/istat-day-1/

And Aengus Kelly, AerCap, has the following to say about another A350 stretch:

Quote:
Kelly has doubts that there is large market for a potential further A350 stretch beyond the -1000. Such an A350 version “would not be a lessor aircraft” because of what he expects to be a relatively small operator base.

Ref http://aviationweek.com/commercial-a...us-production-rates-be-unrealistic

Although the customer base will be small, aircraft with crippled range should sell 'reasonably'. At least 787-10 and a hypothetical A350-1100 should have better MZFW range than the 777 non-ER versions, something that should boost sales a bit.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
crimsonchin
Posts: 530
Joined: Fri Feb 07, 2014 8:16 pm

RE: A350 Stretch May Be Launched At Farnborough - Pt 2

Thu Mar 03, 2016 10:19 am

I'll be surprised if Airbus launches anything at Farnborough. All this talk is starting to remind me of Boeing and the 757 replacement talk.

Quoting Matt6461 (Reply 44):
I wish we had an eyeroll emoji.

Would be apt for your 948598698 A380 threads/borderline obsession.

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