daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Airports and Aviation

Airports and Aviation » Airports | Photos and Videos



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 23rd, 2013, 09:46 AM   #921
Le Male
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Bangkok / Paris
Posts: 473
Likes (Received): 723

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
I sometimes wonder if Airbus would have done better if they would have done the same as Boeing with the 787-10. They could have waited with officially launching the -1000, but making it very clear that it would be launched at some future point.

Although that would have resulted in discussion on if they would be actually launching it or not instead of discussion on why it isn't selling big yet.
I sometimes wonder if Airbus would have done better if they would have opted to completely discard the -800, start with the current -900, initially launch the current -900 and -1000 and launch an even stretched version later (larger than the current -1000). If they did so, I believe that they will have no problem competing head to head with the upcoming 777-9X. Does someone know if it's still possible to stretch the -1000 even more? I'm a bit pessimistic that that would be possible by looking at how they have named the 3 variants (they would have started with -700 if that's possible I believe)
Le Male no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 23rd, 2013, 10:19 AM   #922
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,178
Likes (Received): 62830

Airbus has said recently that they are not looking into building an A350-1100, but that doesn't mean that it will never happen. The -1000 is 73.88 m long, the 747-8 is 76.25 m and the 777-9X will be 76.5 m long so it's physically possible to do a stretch and it's likely that we will see it happen when the A350 product line will get it's 1st major upgrade somewhere in the 2020s.

The -800 is indeed the problem child, Airbus misjudged the 787 with this one. They thought that most airlines would go 8-abreast on the 787, the -800 would have been more competitive against the 787-9. But because most of the airlines have chosen to go 9-abreast on the 787 this changed into the advantage of the Boeing plane.


But with almost 700 orders you can't really say that Airbus made any mistakes in the development of the A350. If they would have made it smaller it would have lost orders to the 777 at the top. If they would have made it bigger it would have lost orders to the 787 at the bottom of the size range. It all evens out in the end, it's not like the airlines will accept that they end up with just 1 choice from either Boeing or Airbus.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction

Zaz965 liked this post
Momo1435 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 23rd, 2013, 12:19 PM   #923
Wezza
©
 
Wezza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Townsville
Posts: 8,883
Likes (Received): 987

If they build an A350-1100, it will certainly be one freaking looking bird. Even the -900 looks fairly long & thin.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xtartrex View Post
Basically, but hey don't let Boeing lovers know the facts, even after death they will be rolling in their grave
Says the Airbus fanboy.

Fact is, they both build very good planes & both will always sprout figures to make their planes look better than the oppositions.
__________________

rickycarter93 liked this post
Wezza no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 23rd, 2013, 07:47 PM   #924
XWB
Too low - terrain
 
XWB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 408
Likes (Received): 441

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
Since Airbus has already decided to switch the -800 and the -1000 EIS it means that there are new earlier delivery slots for the -1000. This could be the reason for several of the recent -1000 orders and conversions, the availability issue is not playing a big role anymore. And the numbers will start to grow as the 2020 will be coming closer. Even with the 777X coming up as a improved competitor the order peak of the A350-1000 will still be in the 2nd half of this decade.
I'm not sure what you exactly mean with "switched', but the -1000 EIS is still 2017. Maybe the -800 has been put behind the -1000, but this has not been confirmed by Airbus (yet?).
XWB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 23rd, 2013, 08:58 PM   #925
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,178
Likes (Received): 62830

Switched as in 1st the -1000, then the -800 instead of the current schedule. It's not confirmed by Airbus yet, nut they are actively marketing airlines away from the smallest version to the -900 and the -1000 and they want to create more production slots for the -1000. It's very obvious that are at least putting the -1000 in front of the -800 when it comes to their top priority after the -900.
__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction

Highcliff, Zaz965 liked this post
Momo1435 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 12:57 PM   #926
ddes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,464
Likes (Received): 929

It certainly makes more sense for the -1000 to EIS before the -800, given the gradual increasing orders the former's getting. The advancements and lessons learned from the -1000 may therefore be applied on producing a more efficient -800. It reminds me of the Airbus A330 in some ways - a lot of the initial advancements of the A330-300 allowed the A330-200 to become a very popular aircraft before it was overtaken by the improved economics of the A330-300.

However, I do wonder what this might mean for Hawaiian Airlines who switched from Boeing 767 to the A330 in anticipation for the A350-800 which as it turns out, might be very delayed or canceled. The A350-900 is unfortunately too large for them, in my opinion.
ddes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 04:58 PM   #927
Xtartrex
Your nemesis
 
Xtartrex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Free citizen of the world
Posts: 1,606

Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo1435 View Post
The fact is that there are no typical lay-outs so their are "facts".

A A350-1000 will for sure beat an ANA 777-300ER with 213 in a 4 class lay-out by more then 25%. But the fuel burn advantage will be lower then 20% if it's going against a Air France 3 class 468 seats 300ER.

Unless all the airline opt to go 10 abreast on the A350 the highest density 777s will still have very competitive economics against the A350.

And at the end of the day both manufacturers sell their products to airlines and not "fans".
The problem is that fans (brainless that is) are the ones more interested on seeing their loved airplanes be the best and whatever the airlines choose is not enough to make them understand the real world.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wezza View Post
If they build an A350-1100, it will certainly be one freaking looking bird. Even the -900 looks fairly long & thin.


Says the Airbus fanboy.

Fact is, they both build very good planes & both will always sprout figures to make their planes look better than the oppositions.
I also like Antonov, Sukhoi, Tupolev and Boeing, that makes me an "Aviation enthusiast" rather than an Airbus fan
Xtartrex no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 06:25 PM   #928
XWB
Too low - terrain
 
XWB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 408
Likes (Received): 441

Quote:
Originally Posted by ddes View Post
It certainly makes more sense for the -1000 to EIS before the -800, given the gradual increasing orders the former's getting.
Putting the -800 behind the -1000 will not move the EIS of the latter one forward because it depends on the more powerful RR engine which won't be make its first flight until mid-2016.

There must be another reason - unrelated to the -1000 - to move the EIS of the -800 further back. Maybe Airbus will take more time to optimize the airframe so it can compete better with the 787-9.
XWB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 07:55 PM   #929
ddes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 7,464
Likes (Received): 929

Quote:
Originally Posted by XWB View Post
Putting the -800 behind the -1000 will not move the EIS of the latter one forward because it depends on the more powerful RR engine which won't be make its first flight until mid-2016.

There must be another reason - unrelated to the -1000 - to move the EIS of the -800 further back. Maybe Airbus will take more time to optimize the airframe so it can compete better with the 787-9.
Maybe I didn't make myself clear, but I didn't say that the -1000 will EIS earlier just because the -800 might being pushed back.
ddes no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 08:14 PM   #930
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,805
Likes (Received): 11245

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xtartrex View Post
The problem is that fans (brainless that is) are the ones more interested on seeing their loved airplanes be the best and whatever the airlines choose is not enough to make them understand the real world.

I also like Antonov, Sukhoi, Tupolev and Boeing, that makes me an "Aviation enthusiast" rather than an Airbus fan
Well, fans and enthusiasts have their opinions about which aircraft is best and how the best can be ever better. I am an enthusiast too for Boeing, Bombardier, Embraer, and Airbus aircraft, and I am starting to like the Sukhoi aircraft too.

As for an A350-1100, that would be really interesting, especially how it will be called on the three-digit aircraft codes... Will it be called the 351? And how many miles do you want the -1100 model to fly to? Plus how many seats you'd like to see in it?
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine ForumsSF Bay Area ForumsBay Area TransitNEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: FlickrPhotobucketInstagram

San Carlos • San Bruno • San Mateo • Saint Helena • Ross

Highcliff liked this post
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 08:29 PM   #931
Deadeye Reloaded
Cold Ass Honkey
 
Deadeye Reloaded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Göttingen/Lüdenscheid/Rybnik
Posts: 2,329
Likes (Received): 8961

There is another option for Airbus to compete with the B777-9X:
A double-shortened A380-600!

(With a length of about 60 m and a wingspan of 80 m this would be one funny looking bird, though. )
__________________
I may not be perfect, but Jesus thinks I´m to die for.
I can't stand auto correct. It's my worst enema!
I often quote myself. I find it adds spice to the conversation.
What Is Love?
Deadeye Reloaded no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 08:36 PM   #932
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,805
Likes (Received): 11245

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deadeye Reloaded View Post
There is another option for Airbus to compete with the B777-9X:
A double-shortened A380-600!

(With a length of about 60 m and a wingspan of 80 m this would be one funny looking bird, though. )
Wait, what? An A380-600? That reminds me of the B747SP, with a shorter fuselage but quite a powerful plane with a long range... I hope this is fiction, though because it'll mean more comprehensive tests may be needed to see if a shortened double-deck fuselage could withstand the elements while offering better range and fewer seats... Perhaps this could compete also with the B747-8.
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine ForumsSF Bay Area ForumsBay Area TransitNEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: FlickrPhotobucketInstagram

San Carlos • San Bruno • San Mateo • Saint Helena • Ross
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 10:08 PM   #933
future.architect
Far East London
 
future.architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,800
Likes (Received): 2031

Some of you may already be familiar with Airbus's technical publication FAST. This month they have produced a special edition on the A350.

Enjoy
future.architect no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 24th, 2013, 10:14 PM   #934
future.architect
Far East London
 
future.architect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 6,800
Likes (Received): 2031

As for the future of the A350 programme, I think the -800 has to stay. I fully expect it to because they have been telling everyone they will produce it recently. If I where running things, I would build a more optimised version, reducing weight wherever I could, possibly with a smaller wing.

I also think an -1100 is a no brainer although it would have to trade range for performance although I am sure Rolls Royce have said the Trent XWB still has more room to grow. The wing could be an issue though but if its lighter than the 777-9 then it could be attractive.
future.architect no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2013, 12:25 AM   #935
XWB
Too low - terrain
 
XWB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 408
Likes (Received): 441

Quote:
Originally Posted by future.architect View Post
I also think an -1100 is a no brainer although it would have to trade range for performance although I am sure Rolls Royce have said the Trent XWB still has more room to grow. The wing could be an issue though but if its lighter than the 777-9 then it could be attractive.
I see 2 possible options. One is a stretch like the 787-10: same wing with a slightly engine thrust increase and reduced range to around 7000nm. Second is a stretch like the 77W was: new, bigger wing, more powerful engines and keeping the range around 8000nm.

A bigger wing will of course have to fit in the (new) Beluga.
XWB no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2013, 02:24 AM   #936
Deadeye Reloaded
Cold Ass Honkey
 
Deadeye Reloaded's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Göttingen/Lüdenscheid/Rybnik
Posts: 2,329
Likes (Received): 8961

Cockpit of the A350 presented by an Airbus test pilot.
__________________
I may not be perfect, but Jesus thinks I´m to die for.
I can't stand auto correct. It's my worst enema!
I often quote myself. I find it adds spice to the conversation.
What Is Love?

Cager, Equario, Highcliff liked this post
Deadeye Reloaded no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2013, 12:13 PM   #937
noir-dresses
bling bling
 
noir-dresses's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Toronto-Zagreb-Zrce-Dubai
Posts: 5,745
Likes (Received): 2346

Just a few days after the Paris Airshow and we have SAS on board the 350 program, good job Airbus.
noir-dresses está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2013, 03:00 PM   #938
sacto7654
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 796
Likes (Received): 283

Quote:
Originally Posted by noir-dresses View Post
Just a few days after the Paris Airshow and we have SAS on board the 350 program, good job Airbus.
I'm not surprised. SAS needs to replace the aging A340-300 soon and the A350XWB-900 would be the perfect plane to do this.
sacto7654 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2013, 04:14 PM   #939
swe
Registered User
 
swe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Vaxjö
Posts: 81
Likes (Received): 8

Well, let us hope that SAS can sort out its financial situation. And maybe a merger with Finnair...

Also, I think that the Company should drop some of its less profitable national routes in Sweden.
swe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 25th, 2013, 06:42 PM   #940
Momo1435
-----アンジュルム-----
 
Momo1435's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: アルフェナンデンライン
Posts: 35,178
Likes (Received): 62830

For the people that don't want to look it up.

SAS announced a MoU for an order of 8x A350-900 and 4x A330-300.

Quote:
SAS signs with Airbus: Total renewal of long haul fleet

New Airbus fleet will bring SAS into a new long haul future.

SAS and Airbus have signed a Memorandum of Understanding for the order of eight new A350-900 XWB and four A330-300 Enhanced. The agreement marks the launch of SAS' long haul strategy of an extensive fleet renewal plan, options for more aircraft and a total upgrade of passenger cabins on existing fleet.

SAS recently launched a completely new service concept to create the most modern flight experience for our customers. The customer offer is backed by a comprehensive fleet renewal plan with 65 short haul aircraft already announced and initiated, now complemented with an extensive long haul fleet plan. Key deliverables within the strategy 4Excellence Next Generation have paved the way.
SAS press release:
http://se.yhp.waymaker.net/sasgroup/....asp?id=269175


__________________
Support your Idols
キタ ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━ ฅ(๑⊙д⊙๑)ฅ!! ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━!!!
Japan Projects & Construction
Momo1435 está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
airbus, airplane

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium