Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

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

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri May 27, 2016 12:40 pm

Trent 500 engine also came with extremely high maintenance costs compared to the GE90 engine.
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
IndianicWorld
Posts: 3346
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2001 11:32 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri May 27, 2016 1:01 pm

Certainly excited to see the A350-1000 fly. The A350-900 was good but the scale of the larger variant should make for interesting viewing.

Airbus are taking some good strides in their product line, but lets hope they can get those supply issues sorted.

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 79):
You're really stretching at this point.

Stretching.. Seems like you were stretching to just rip apart anything I said more like it but good for you  
 
AM744
Posts: 1471
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2001 11:05 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri May 27, 2016 8:35 pm

Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 7):
Copycats. 

Signed
Tupolev

 
 
a380787
Posts: 4573
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:38 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri May 27, 2016 8:48 pm

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 99):

OK - aside from the structural efficiency issues 77west referred to, it all relates to it being an ill conceived attempt to address a market at low cost by using a derivative of the A340-300 on the assumption that oil would stay low, and that any fuel burn deficit could be made up for in capital costs. Specifically this led to

It being a quad with the inherent (if overstated) disadvantages that brings

I'll add that back when 345/346 were on the drawing table, Airbus still wasn't sold on the idea that twins should be omnipotent. The whole "4 engines 4 long haul" rang very true at TLS.

And they figured it was a lot easier asking RR to make a 62k lb blowdryer than one that makes 115k lb.

Of course, Boeing totally slaughtered them with the 77W, which came out even better than even Boeing's wildest dreams. And when oil spiked to $140/bbl, the rest is history.
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 966
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat May 28, 2016 12:13 am

Quoting a380787 (Reply 103):
I'll add that back when 345/346 were on the drawing table, Airbus still wasn't sold on the idea that twins should be omnipotent. The whole "4 engines 4 long haul" rang very true at TLS.

And they figured it was a lot easier asking RR to make a 62k lb blowdryer than one that makes 115k lb.

Of course, Boeing totally slaughtered them with the 77W, which came out even better than even Boeing's wildest dreams. And when oil spiked to $140/bbl, the rest is history.

I wonder if an A330 stretch to somewhere inbetween the 345/346 could have worked. With an upgraded Trent 700 in the 80-90k LBF region.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
L0VE2FLY
Posts: 1011
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:54 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat May 28, 2016 12:53 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 24):
So ugly. No alternative to the beautiful Boeings when it comes to looks.

Except for the weird nose, there's nothing ugly about the A350. Do you also think the A330/340 are ugly too?!  
.

Quoting KarelXWB (Reply 80):

Good to see she has the A359' winglets, I'm not a fan of the raked wingtips.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13217
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat May 28, 2016 6:49 am

Quoting BaconButty (Reply 99):
It being a quad with the inherent (if overstated) disadvantages that brings

But it should also be noted that there were some inherent advantages, especially in hot/high.... probably the clinching point for SA and IB, especially made manifest in Boeing's disturbingly-public temper tantrum when the latter topped up their order.


Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 101):
Seems like you were stretching to just rip apart anything I said

No need, THAT'S rather easy to do.  


Quoting a380787 (Reply 103):
The whole "4 engines 4 long haul" rang very true at TLS.

   So many people forget how that was actually Airbus' chosen slogan before VS borrowed and further popularized it.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
a380787
Posts: 4573
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 4:38 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat May 28, 2016 6:56 am

Let's just clarify a very weird point - official short hand designators of new aircraft. Apparently, the 350-1000 is "35K" while the 787-10 is actually 78X (Roman "X" 10) even though any usage of "X" sounds like unlaunched paper concepts.

I've been calling it 78J all wrong this time.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13217
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat May 28, 2016 7:04 am

Quoting a380787 (Reply 107):
I've been calling it 78J all wrong this time.

A lot of people did, as it's the 10th letter of the alphabet.

K for Kilo
X for 10

....meh, just guessed a little off. No hate though, J seemed a better fit anyway.   
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
seahawk
Posts: 9627
Joined: Fri May 27, 2005 1:29 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat May 28, 2016 8:59 am

That could be the next A346.

Quoting L0VE2FLY (Reply 105):
Except for the weird nose, there's nothing ugly about the A350. Do you also think the A330/340 are ugly too?!

A343 is okay.
 
L0VE2FLY
Posts: 1011
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2012 10:54 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Sat May 28, 2016 9:37 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 109):
A343 is okay.

To each his own. I think the whole A330/340 lineup is absolutely stunning, that A300>>340 nose section is a work of art.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3669
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon May 30, 2016 12:14 am

Quoting IndianicWorld (Reply 73):
It is wider than the 787 though

Which really made the XWB marketing moniker more poignant as the 787 standardised around 9-abreast instead of the initial 8-abreast.

Really looking forward to seeing this new A35K rotating into the air, that extra length will look really dramatic on lift-off.
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2451
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon May 30, 2016 4:24 am

Just absolutely gorgeous. I just feel that they should have made it even longer, so that airlines won't be so tempted to neglect it in favor of the 777-9. IMO Airbus really needs an A35K at 80 meters with increased fuel capacity so that it can fly a full 8,000nm at "full passenger payload".

One thing I've long thought about (since the 744ER) is the possibility of designing "wet" wing root fairings. Yes, I realize that there are usually ram air ducts and other such miscellany here. The advantage would be that the auxiliary fuel tanks would not replace revenue cargo positions such as has happened in 744ER, A345, A32X ACT, and A342/A343 ACT.
We fly JETS, we don't fly donkeys.
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13217
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon May 30, 2016 5:52 am

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 112):
I just feel that they should have made it even longer, so that airlines won't be so tempted to neglect it in favor of the 777-9

What seems likely to sell the 779 over the A35K will be payload over long range (which makes LH's order somewhat confounding, but still), hence the ME3 and CX going for it so readily.


Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 112):
A342/A343 ACT.

When did the A342/A343 ever had an auxiliary tank?
Pretty sure it was just the same space in the middle of all A330/A340 designs.
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
77west
Posts: 966
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2009 11:52 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon May 30, 2016 6:43 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 114):
When did the A342/A343 ever had an auxiliary tank?
Pretty sure it was just the same space in the middle of all A330/A340 designs.

Yeah, it is "deactivated" on the older A330-300 but is "Activated" or used on all the other ones. Its the bit between the wings. Its not available for cargo.
77West - AW109S - BE90 - JS31 - B1900 - Q300 - ATR72 - DC9-30 - MD80 - B733 - A320 - B738 - A300-B4 - B773 - B77W
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2451
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon May 30, 2016 6:48 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 114):
When did the A342/A343 ever had an auxiliary tank?
Pretty sure it was just the same space in the middle of all A330/A340 designs.

They always had one, it was designed pretty much from introduction. LH used to, years ago routinely carry them, then they had them removed because they weren't necessary from a fleet standpoint. A340 ACTs are like an LD6 ULD. A342/3 can carry 2 ACTs in the forward part of the aft cargo bay, and actually the A346 can carry one ACT in the rear of the fore cargo bay. A340-213X/A340-8000 had the tanks as standard equipment and more powerful -5C4 engines from the factory. A340 family ACTs hold 7,200 litres. The A345 doesn't have ACTs per se because the second center fuel tank is built into the actual frame, it's not removable like 772LRs. AFAIK A345 operators had the option of either a 5 or 7-frame second center tank.

The thing is - and also why they weren't that popular - that they're only useful on VLH/ULH flights carrying a payload less than full pax + baggage. You can immediately see why that wouldn't be popular with an airline.
We fly JETS, we don't fly donkeys.
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2451
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon May 30, 2016 6:50 am

Quoting 77west (Reply 115):

Yeah, it is "deactivated" on the older A330-300 but is "Activated" or used on all the other ones. Its the bit between the wings. Its not available for cargo.

That's only the A330-300. ACT for A340-200/300/600 takes up 2 LD3 positions and is install-able/removable fairly quickly if the a/c has the necessary mods covered under the relevant SBs.
We fly JETS, we don't fly donkeys.
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Mon May 30, 2016 7:27 am

Quoting Pellegrine (Reply 112):
One thing I've long thought about (since the 744ER) is the possibility of designing "wet" wing root fairings. Yes, I realize that there are usually ram air ducts and other such miscellany here. The advantage would be that the auxiliary fuel tanks would not replace revenue cargo positions such as has happened in 744ER, A345, A32X ACT, and A342/A343 ACT.

Interesting idea. But wouldn't there be structural considerations? The belly and the wings are already strong structures designed from the outset to carry stuff. The wing root fairings are designed just to keep the air flowing. I don't think they're that strong. So you'd need some way to carry the load from the fuel to the fuselage structure.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2451
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue May 31, 2016 2:12 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 117):

Yes they couldn't be just fiberglass/carbon "pretty things".

They'd have to be designed for the weight and for crash resistance (i.e. belly landings). The A345 initially had this specific crash resistance issue with FAA certification, as IIRC the original A345 design used the outer skin as the 2nd center tank "floor". FAA was concerned about this enough in a belly landing situation that Airbus had to design a beefier structure to protect the 2nd center tank.

Now, no one go patent my idea lol.
We fly JETS, we don't fly donkeys.
 
User avatar
HECA
Posts: 187
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 2:35 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue May 31, 2016 7:21 am

Quoting L0VE2FLY (Reply 110):

To each his own. I think the whole A330/340 lineup is absolutely stunning, that A300>>340 nose section is a work of art.

I fully agree! And it's the only regret I have about the A350 design...
KL, LH, LX, BA, AF, TK, UX, TP, AZ, HV, SK, IB, WX, UA, AA, US, DL, AC, LA, KQ, MS, 4D, ZA, RJ, QR, EK, CX, HX, JL, SQ, MH, FY, MU, CA, TG, UL, FD, K6
 
User avatar
EPA001
Posts: 3893
Joined: Tue Sep 12, 2006 8:13 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Tue May 31, 2016 10:37 am

Some comments from John Leahy on the A350-1000 and the B777-9:

Quote:

On the widebody side, Airbus is still looking at stretching the A350 further, but has not yet made a decision. Leahy remains unconvinced that the market has shifted from the 777-300ER category, in which the A350-1000 sits, to a larger aircraft such as the 777-9X or an even bigger A350. But Kieran Rao, Executive Vice-President Strategy and Marketing, stressed that Airbus would find it relatively easy to stretch the aircraft further should demand be sufficient.

From: http://aviationweek.com/commercial-a...2=45345b749e464777ac8ab3c86a216772
 
User avatar
Pellegrine
Posts: 2451
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2007 10:19 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Jun 01, 2016 3:41 am

Quoting EPA001 (Reply 120):
Some comments from John Leahy on the A350-1000 and the B777-9:

Quote:

On the widebody side, Airbus is still looking at stretching the A350 further, but has not yet made a decision. Leahy remains unconvinced that the market has shifted from the 777-300ER category, in which the A350-1000 sits, to a larger aircraft such as the 777-9X or an even bigger A350. But Kieran Rao, Executive Vice-President Strategy and Marketing, stressed that Airbus would find it relatively easy to stretch the aircraft further should demand be sufficient.

From: http://aviationweek.com/commercial-a...16772

I think the "problem" and "concern" lies in the widespread utilization of flat-bed products not only for First, but also Business. Added to the expanding popularity of Premium Economy on long-haul flights....all of this uses a lot more floor space. It isn't hard to envision a 77W-sized aircraft with only 200 seats. Separately, I predict this issue will be the driver for the A380-900 if we ever see one.
We fly JETS, we don't fly donkeys.
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:52 am

Quoting seahawk (Reply 24):

So ugly. No alternative to the beautiful Boeings when it comes to looks.

Completely shocking statement coming from you!
  
@DadCelo
 
User avatar
gatibosgru
Posts: 1766
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:48 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Jun 01, 2016 4:56 am

Quoting L0VE2FLY (Reply 110):
To each his own. I think the whole A330/340 lineup is absolutely stunning, that A300>>340 nose section is a work of art.

Absolutely agree! Glad we have the NEO keeping the design alive for quite some time 
@DadCelo
 
User avatar
AirlineCritic
Posts: 1758
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 1:07 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:11 pm

Pretty, IMHO.

I do wonder how long the 350-1100 or 350-2000 will look...
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13217
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 2:19 am

Quoting AirlineCritic (Reply 124):
I do wonder how long the 350-1100 or 350-2000 will look...

Yeah, about that.... could we just go back to -200, 300, etc please?

The only thing more stupid than this whole "start everything at 8" business, is that both OEMs went with it.   
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
ordell
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 1:33 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 3:42 am

Jeez that thing looks like a 340-600. Ready for tailstrikes galore?
 
User avatar
LAX772LR
Topic Author
Posts: 13217
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 11:06 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 4:25 am

Quoting ordell (Reply 126):
Jeez that thing looks like a 340-600. Ready for tailstrikes galore?

How many A346 tail strikes can you cite, in commercial operation?
I myself, suspect a more prosaic motive... ~Thranduil
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:43 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 125):
The only thing more stupid than this whole "start everything at 8" business, is that both OEMs went with i

China. It's all about China. "8" is a lucky number and very significant in Chinese society, which in turn has a big influence and presence in large parts of East and Southeast Asia outside China and Taiwan.

The significance of 8 in Chinese society is much bigger than say, "13" in many western societies.
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
jacobin777
Posts: 12262
Joined: Sat Sep 11, 2004 6:29 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 6:39 am

Quoting ordell (Reply 126):

Jeez that thing looks like a 340-600. Ready for tailstrikes galore?

This is what I wrote much earlier.

Quoting jacobin777 (Reply 7):

It is basically the same length as the B77W
"Up the Irons!"
 
User avatar
Richard28
Posts: 2751
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 5:42 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 7:29 am

Quoting ordell (Reply 126):
Jeez that thing looks like a 340-600. Ready for tailstrikes galore?
Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 127):
How many A346 tail strikes can you cite, in commercial operation?

absolutely.. not an issue. in any event, lengths are as follows:

B777-300ER : 73.9m
A340-600 : 75.36m
A350-1000 : 73.8m

So the new A350-1000 is the shortest of the three.

In any event, fuselage length is not the only factor in assessing how prone a plane is to tail strike.. so this conversation is slightly silly.
 
User avatar
enzo011
Posts: 1864
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 8:12 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 8:51 am

Quoting Richard28 (Reply 130):
Quoting ordell (Reply 126):
Jeez that thing looks like a 340-600. Ready for tailstrikes galore?
Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 127):
How many A346 tail strikes can you cite, in commercial operation?

absolutely.. not an issue. in any event, lengths are as follows:

B777-300ER : 73.9m
A340-600 : 75.36m
A350-1000 : 73.8m

So the new A350-1000 is the shortest of the three.

In any event, fuselage length is not the only factor in assessing how prone a plane is to tail strike.. so this conversation is slightly silly.

In any case the 779 will be even longer than the A346 as its length will be 76.7m, I don't see a lot of posters lamenting the tail strikes that it will have...
 
osteogenesis
Posts: 494
Joined: Tue May 27, 2003 9:44 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:13 am

Quoting LAX772LR (Reply 113):
What seems likely to sell the 779 over the A35K will be payload over long range (which makes LH's order somewhat confounding, but still), hence the ME3 and CX going for it so readily.

I am pretty sure the A350-1000 will outsell the 777-9 in the long run. Just wait and see.
 
Motorhussy
Posts: 3669
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2000 7:49 am

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 10:27 am

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 128):
China. It's all about China. "8" is a lucky number and very significant in Chinese society,

Has t really helped the A380-800.

How long will the fuselage of the A350-1100 be?
come visit the south pacific
 
User avatar
Starlionblue
Posts: 19937
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2004 9:54 pm

RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Thu Jun 02, 2016 12:16 pm

Quoting Motorhussy (Reply 133):
Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 128):
China. It's all about China. "8" is a lucky number and very significant in Chinese society,

Has t really helped the A380-800.

I don't know. But it's still all about China. 
"There are no stupid questions, but there are a lot of inquisitive idiots." - John Ringo
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 11:40 am

And now out of paint...


Image
https://twitter.com/Airbus
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
euroflyer
Posts: 638
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:20 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 11:52 am

KarelXWB wrote:
And now out of paint...
Image
https://twitter.com/Airbus


I was right at my office window while she was tugged. It's one really impressive fuselage (the upcoming A350-2000 will definitely be a massive frame). Can't wait for the first take-off now.
Born to fly !
 
TranscendZac
Posts: 138
Joined: Sat Jun 13, 2015 12:50 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:51 pm

Thanks Karel for posting. What a beautiful aircraft the A35J is. :o When will she get engines installed and first flight? I've said it in another thread, but I think the A350 is the best looking plane Airbus has ever made.
Zac
 
User avatar
Thunderboltdrgn
Posts: 2039
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 5:39 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 12:54 pm

Like a thunderbolt of lightning the Dragon roars across the sky. Il Drago Ruggente
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 1:22 pm

Another angle:

Image
Airbus A350-1041 by Rami Khanna-Prade, on Flickr
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.
 
User avatar
william
Posts: 3331
Joined: Thu Jun 10, 1999 1:31 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 1:33 pm

So this is the 777-300ER replacement everyone has been clamoring for, smart move Airbus. The 777 gave Boeing near monopoly rule in this segment, while Airbus will not share the same market domination because of the 787, the A350 family will do very, very well for Airbus.
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 2:46 pm

Personally, I see the A350-1000 as being a very aesthetically pleasing plane! The proportions will be similar to the 777-300ER, which is a good thing!

This is the best looking big twin to date, but I think the 777-9 is going to look a lot cooler when it rolls out in 2-3 years.
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
User avatar
Boeing778X
Posts: 3268
Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 2:48 pm

euroflyer wrote:
KarelXWB wrote:
And now out of paint...
Image
https://twitter.com/Airbus


I was right at my office window while she was tugged. It's one really impressive fuselage (the upcoming A350-2000 will definitely be a massive frame). Can't wait for the first take-off now.


Oh the A350-2000 (or 1100...or 8000) was launched, was it? :D

Links? Want to see renderings!
United Airlines: $#!ttin' On Everyone Since 1931
 
User avatar
A330freak
Posts: 250
Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2011 2:28 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 2:50 pm

Pics from the Airbus Photo Gallery (http://www.airbus.com/galleries/photo-gallery/)
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
 
User avatar
JetBuddy
Posts: 2565
Joined: Wed Dec 25, 2013 1:04 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 2:55 pm

Wow it looks absolutely stunning! I don't think it looks too long.. it's very proportional. This will definately compete with the A340-500, 747-8i and Concorde as the best looking airliner.
 
Tedd
Posts: 474
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2016 11:22 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 3:36 pm

Terrific looking plane! Will be all the better with the RR XWB `97`s hanging from the wings.
Does anyone have info when the engines will be installed?
 
User avatar
SEPilot
Posts: 5614
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2006 10:21 pm

Re: RE: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 4:04 pm

Ncfc99 wrote:
Quoting 77west (Reply 39):but at some point the fuselage diameter to length ratio reaches its limits.
Differing construction changes that ratio, this has to be taken into account rather than just taring the 3511 with the 346 brush.

Quoting 77west (Reply 39):A346 required 380t vs 354t for the same mission as the 77W
The talk is that the 3511 will be 30t+ lighter than the 779X carrying similar payloads whilst using less fuel to do so.

Quoting 77west (Reply 39):The A350-1000 is the maximum of that fuselage.
Do you have any links or info to back this up? (genuine request for further info) or

Quoting 77west (Reply 39):If Airbus really wanted a true XWB they would have developed a 10/11 abreast twinjet family, wider than the 777, capable of 300-450 seats in a 10 abreast at 18" or 11 abreast at 17.3" layout.
The 3511 will be Airbuses 400(ish)seater.

There is a lot that goes into designing a fuselage, and there are a variety of ways to design in the stiffness needed. That also is a variable; the amount of flex the fuselage can be allowed to have. My understanding is that when Airbus designed the A346 they essentially used a "brute force" approach; where they found excessive flex they just added stiffening, and ended up with excessive weight. There have been other extremely long aircraft that have not had that problem; the first being the DC8-60's. The 753 was even longer, I believe, and also did not suffer from excessive weight. So we cannot sit back and say that because the A346 was excessively heavy that any stretch beyond a certain length to diameter ratio is not going to work. We just do not know enough about the details of the construction, which are vital. One thing that was discovered during the design of the 707 was that at higher speeds the center of lift moved on the wings causing the attitude to change. But the flex of the fuselage caused the angle of incidence of the horizontal stabilizer to change exactly the right amount to counteract it. While this was entirely coincidence that it happened that way, the Boeing engineers of course claimed credit. I read about this in "The Road to the 707" by William H. Cook, one of the engineers who worked on it. It is an excellent read, and is still available. Of course with fly by wire it would be possible to artificially achieve the same thing, but they did not have it on the 707, nor did they have the sophisticated computer simulations that designers now have.
The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
 
User avatar
ikolkyo
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 8:43 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:01 pm

For me personally this aircraft suffers the same issue as the A346. Too much length.
 
Sooner787
Posts: 2693
Joined: Thu Jul 18, 2013 1:44 am

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 7:54 pm

Airbus just posted a pic of their first A35J rolling out of the paint shop

https://www.facebook.com/airbus/photos/ ... =3&theater
 
User avatar
KarelXWB
Posts: 26968
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:13 pm

Re: PIC: First A350-1000 Pushes Back Out Of Hangar

Fri Jul 29, 2016 8:50 pm

JetBuddy wrote:
I don't think it looks too long.. it's very proportional.


Agreed.

Especially the rear section doesn't look too long.

Image
What we leave behind is not as important as how we've lived.

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