Yes circular would seem appropriate, although I don't see that really as a problem. A manufacture needs a keenly layed out product range. The A320.5 (simple stretch, engine PIP and possible the new wing) vs. the A321; Similar seat mile fuel burn, but in a smaller package and slightly less range. Th...
Jump to postDifferentiation is just not there. Want more seats than A320, just get the A321 and be happy about the extra seats… Fair enough, instead of newly created from thin air, it's a reincarnation to make room for the A225. Still seems pretty dubious to me. The leeham article features a photoshop culled f...
Jump to postDifferentiation is just not there. Want more seats than A320, just get the A321 and be happy about the extra seats… A320.5 seems to have been created out of thin air solely to push the A320 out of the way to make a gap for A225. Seems pretty dubious to me. I think Keesje floated the A320.5 quite a ...
Jump to postThanks a lot for that Lightsaber. Really nice, much appreciated 3 Things. 1 The Spey engine is on the original F28. The F100 had the Tay engine on it. I think that reduces the weight increase. 2 Wing area. The F1xxNG has new wing ends which extend the wing span from 28.1m to 29.9m (30.6m effective ...
Jump to postAn A320.5NEO seems a more difficult proposition. "Simply" stretching the A320NEO would reduce range compared to 737MAX, A320NEO & A321NEO too much, I'm not so sure. An A320.5 would almost certainly go along with a significant engine PIP and then there's still a chance it would get the...
Jump to postPersonally I expect Airbus at some point in the future (perhaps at A220-500 launch, perhaps before) to publish an updated production ramp up based on the gates Airbus wants to jump through first as Revelation put it. Cost, demand, full program ownership, all playing a role. I wouldn't be surprised i...
Jump to postThanks a lot for that Lightsaber. Really nice, much appreciated 3 Things. 1 The Spey engine is on the original F28. The F100 had the Tay engine on it. I think that reduces the weight increase. 2 Wing area. The F1xxNG has new wing ends which extend the wing span from 28.1m to 29.9m (30.6m effective f...
Jump to post3. I believe the E2 sales are suffering on range, how to fix this? You ignore the A220, why? Yes, it is heavier, but not all weight is bad: 1. Reduce fuel burn (electrical subsystems weight more, but save fuel). 2. Wing area (if paired with higher cruise, see E2-175 wing extension), as well as help...
Jump to postEven if they wanted a T tailed 5 abreast plane, Boeing wouldn't need to look at Fokker as they have the drawings for the DC9 family all the way to the 717. They even have 2 MD90s which they bought from Delta for some unknown purposes. OP: While an interesting idea, a major issue is - as others have...
Jump to postEven if they wanted a T tailed 5 abreast plane, Boeing wouldn't need to look at Fokker as they have the drawings for the DC9 family all the way to the 717. They even have 2 MD90s which they bought from Delta for some unknown purposes. OP: While an interesting idea, a major issue is - as others have...
Jump to postThe Greta line isn't CASM, it is fuel per passenger mile. CASM is still higher for smaller jets (e.g., still two pilots, you still have one person fueling the plane or driving up the baggage belt cart). Either it is regulated, which would be the Gretta line, or it is fuel cost which might be too mu...
Jump to post1. Does the Fokker have the avionics for the new engines and predictive maintenance? I've read that Fokker Services have looked into condition-based maintenance (CBM), but don't know on what parts or airframes, nor am I really knowledgeable on the subject. In effect, you are predicting a dramatic i...
Jump to postWell strangely, we've seem to have reached some sort of consensus on this for a change (at least some).
Jump to post3. I believe the E2 sales are suffering on range, how to fix this? You ignore the A220, why? Yes, it is heavier, but not all weight is bad: 1. Reduce fuel burn (electrical subsystems weight more, but save fuel). 2. Wing area (if paired with higher cruise, see E2-175 wing extension), as well as help...
Jump to postTaxi645, I think most agree the F100 is a light, reliable aircraft, that's why it is holding out so long. But the Fokker supply chain has vaporized, the drawings are on microfilm, the avionics suit was modern 30 years ago. That makes it a start from scratch, blank sheet/ empty CAD program. :arrow: ...
Jump to postFokker NG jet, an unique opportunity for Boeing? Now I know I will risk my credibility with a lot of people here (if there was any), but sometimes I just like to launch a left field idea, so hear me out. https://www.ngaircraft.com/ - The lightest and most durable airframe in its class. - Extremely ...
Jump to postWould it be feasible for Airbus to create a FAL in Hambourg or Toulouse in order to accelerate production and in middle term to build the A225 ? I guess they are in the middle of restructuring, ramping up Mirabel & Mobile with the goal of trippling production in 2025. Before production is raise...
Jump to postI have a hard time to believe that Airbus let them convert to A350-1000s Perhaps just a few; 4 A350-900 to say 8 1000's and 6 A350F's. Airbus would be quite keen to add more customers to the A350F pool. So for instance: 20 A350-900 8 A350-1000 6 A350F Alternatively: 8 777-9 6 777F Could go both ways.
Jump to postA&B are running businesses not Willy waving competitions. That said, preventing the 777x from gaining traction in this critical stage of it's program is of more strategic value to Airbus than it would be if the 777x would already be in safe waters and already having a stable stream of orders an...
Jump to postLuckily strategy planners at healthy companies not only look at the current situation/cashflow as another poster already pointed out. Any investment at any company anywhere in the world has an initial negative effect on cashflow. Wether you're investing in R&D, in tooling, in production efficien...
Jump to postCurrent A220-series production costs are a symptom of problems and opportunities that Airbus appears to have gripped strongly - they are probably a large part of the reason Airbus was able to purchase the C series so cheaply in the first place. Airbus is focussed on A220 financial performance over ...
Jump to postAirbus in the future will again most likely be production limited on the A320. It is quite possible that by that time the required rate to fullfill narket will be so high that it will be a too large share of the Airbus bussiness. If ever there would be problem with the A320 (future tech incompatibil...
Jump to postOpus99 wrote:you guys always
Why would Airbus want to do that? They can make more money on the A320NEO than an A220 and it has a mature, high rate production process. They'd be mostly competing with themselves since I doubt there would be many orders that they would beat the 737MAX with the A220 that they couldn't have won wit...
Jump to postKind interesting to see the disparity in enthousiasm for optimizing the length vs. optimizing wing perfornance for the NEO. Also considering cost of both adjustments. One could use the same argument (why change what is already selling) for the wing, but I reckon a lot of people are eager the defend...
Jump to postKind interesting to see the disparity in enthousiasm for optimizing the length vs. optimizing wing perfornance for the NEO. Also considering cost of both adjustments. One could use the same argument (why change what is already selling) for the wing, but I reckon a lot of people are eager the defend ...
Jump to postOne could probably argue that had the A320NEO not been production limited anyway and with competion not been severly diminished, a two row stretch of both the A319 and A320 could've been a good idea. As people have pointed out, the NEO was meant as a quick and cheap way to get a competive edge. Ovio...
Jump to postI only find it curious they spent so much effort on the A319neo and A320neo only to discover that the market seems to like the A321 instead. With total neo sales of over 7,500, I'm sure Airbus thinks the effort was well spent and is laughing all the way to the bank. The market likes the A321 as wel...
Jump to postLike the A320, the A319 could've used a two row stretch when they went NEO. It would not have sold great, but probably at least some. In hindsight there would've been less overlap with the A223 as well.
Jump to postThank you. From that thread at the bottom: 62.1m for the 787-9 vs 60.2m for the 787-8.
Wonder if that is any indication for the scope for the wingbox to cope with any wingspan increases related to MTOW increases of possible future developments of the 787.
817Dreamliiner wrote:I think it was something along the lines of 63m for the -9 wing.
If I remember correctly the original plan was for the 787-9 to have a slightly larger wing(span) than the 787-8 and that because of reasons like cost and the performance of the 787-8 having proven to be sufficient, Boeing stuck with the 787-8 wing. Does anybody know the specs of the original wing Bo...
Jump to postWhat about a Beechcraft starship configuration?:
- Engines in the back.
- But with engine weight relieve on the main lifting services.
- No heavy T-tail required.
- No propeller interference with the fuselage.
In the mean time, Airbus wants to increase production rates up to 70/month, while meeting lots of "reservations" from some vendors apparently unable to reach such a rate. I was under the impression that A319/20/21 production slots were valuable. Wouldn't selling such a A321F kind of delay...
Jump to postA well designed and executed a350f has optimistic long-term prospects and a symbiotic value add to a350 program ecosystem. However the risk is; with the ERSF capturing integrators/+partners and a capable LR conversion being able to compete in the general cargo space with economics; a pre-emptive an...
Jump to postNice work, missed the link 4 months ago. Agree a common advanced, easy to produce and flexible fuselage would make sense. Wing/ wingbox/ engines etc seems hard to optimize for both 150 seats 6 flights a day and crossing the Atlantic with a good long haul product. https://live.staticflickr.com/1908/...
Jump to postCompared to 757 / XLR: :arrow: lighter materials, lower maintenance costs :arrow: wider fuselage to facilitate higher capacity versions :arrow: AKH options :arrow: up to 280 passengers :arrow: 86+ inch GTF's, engine choice :arrow: crew rest behind cockpit :arrow: quieter :arrow: bigger wing tanks, ...
Jump to postHow beneficial is it to use the same fuselage? Especially when everything else needs to be different: wing, wing box, gears, tail section and engines. Maybe I missed something, but it doesn’t really sounds like an silver bullit when you need to change so much… I would view it this way: Everything f...
Jump to postCompared to 757 / XLR: :arrow: lighter materials, lower maintenance costs :arrow: wider fuselage to facilitate higher capacity versions :arrow: AKH options :arrow: up to 280 passengers :arrow: 86+ inch GTF's, engine choice :arrow: crew rest behind cockpit :arrow: quieter :arrow: bigger wing tanks, ...
Jump to postAnd of course Willie Walsh comes in with not so fast https://twitter.com/laurence_frost/status/1398271547022979081?s=21 He is saying surprisingly little; he says let’s wait and see. Something neither A or B can or will do… Actual quotes from the actual article behind the tweet: “Let’s wait and see,...
Jump to postYes, I do also expect a simple stretch of the 900 long term. To meet the requirements of a successful freighter, it would need it's own configuration. I would rather expect a simple shrink of the -1000 for a freighter like putting the -900 rear section on the -1000. Yes, I don''t think we disagree....
Jump to postCould an A350-950 be a replacement for the -1000? The -1000 doesn't sell well. I guess it's overstretched with length/ fuselage hight = 12. A 70,1 m long plane would be 11,5, the -900 has 11. However the B777-300ER has length/ fuselage width of 11,9. That's very long. Strange that Boeing stretched ...
Jump to postCould an A350-950 be a replacement for the -1000? The -1000 doesn't sell well. I guess it's overstretched with length/ fuselage hight = 12. A 70,1 m long plane would be 11,5, the -900 has 11. However the B777-300ER has length/ fuselage width of 11,9. That's very long. Strange that Boeing stretched ...
Jump to postA higher gross weight 787 would be a significant investment. Missing the 77W replacement cycle might be even more costly. https://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1339277 Ahead of time again I see. :) I'll read through it, thanks. A significant investment yes, but unavoidable I reckon if the...
Jump to postGreat effort and work that you put in. You definitely identified a big issue going forward and that is with existing MTOW on 787/A350 at current lengths/Wingspans they will basically be too capable with new engines. Thank you. I agree with that for the A350. I think the 787 is fine with future engi...
Jump to postFocus on improving the already existing 787 variants. Shave some weight, aerodynamic enhancements and fine tuning, incremental engine improvements, enhancements to the interior. The 787 is a very good aircraft, no need to reinvent the wheel. As for MTOM improments, no I don't agree. The 787 is alre...
Jump to postSo what are the options Boeing has if the 777x fails to gain sufficient market traction? What can they do with the 787 to the fill part of the void? https://i.postimg.cc/q7QVq8kC/787NG.jpg 228T MTOW: Current wing(box) converted to a 58.8m folding to 52m to fit in D gates. 787-8 Next generations engi...
Jump to postIn the duopoly world Airbus does not necessarily need a very favourable ROI on the a potential 350F itself. It has the potential to put the nail on the coffin of the 777x . An A350F would be more economical both from a production economy of scale perspective (A350 rate vs. 777) as well as operation...
Jump to postIn the duopoly world Airbus does not necessarily need a very favourable ROI on the a potential 350F itself. It has the potential to put the nail on the coffin of the 777x. An A350F would be more economical both from a production economy of scale perspective (A350 rate vs. 777) as well as operation c...
Jump to postI suspect a passenger variant of this 950 will be launched as well. [...]The range of course would be exceptional. The chance of that happening is close to zero I think. If there is one thing the passenger A350 doesn't need than it 's more range. I would have thought this would be the Qantas A350 s...
Jump to post