Aviation24.be

I have heard that Airbus is building the A350 fuselage in "shells". Huge panels with built in stringers that will be bolted together. This looks like it may be as good as the barrels. We just have to see how this turns out.

As for the A350 using bleed air instead of all electric, we have to see how ...

How would Airbus do a A320 replacement? Will it be CFRP panel on frame ala A350 or wound barrel like the 787? I would think a 737 replacement made with two barrel sections would be cheaper to build then an A320 replacement with the panel on frame construction.

Will Boeing build a simple stretch ...

The A350-1000 (in its current form) would be narrower then the 777-300. I would think it would be slightly more cramped for passengers then the 777-300. But operating costs will be the deciding factor for the Airlines

Boeing has a lot of time to decide what to do here. They could do the 787-10 or ...

They want more range? 8,000 nm isn't enough? Even the A350-1000 won't have enough range for them then.

I get the impression some people think the A350 is quite a bit larger then the 787. The A350's fuselage is only about 9 INCHES wider then the 787, and the wing a little bit bigger. If Boeing ...

The 787 doesnt use bleed air from the engines to pressurize the cabin so I don't see a fuel savings by keeping the cabin at 8,000 feet instead of 6000.

A composite frame would be better less corrosion problem, but the completed fuselage would still have more seams to maintain then the 787 fuselage ...

I think the A350 will be a better aircraft then the A330, and the A330 is pretty darn good. I think it will sell. Boeing has made a lot of promisses with the 787, now they have to deliver. They have a really tight flight test schedual, but their production schedual is even tighter. No composite ...

But when you streach an airplane it weighs more so either you carry less payload or put bigger engines on it and increase the maximum take off weight. Bigger engines means higher fuel burn. The 787-9 has a slightly longer wing, slightly uprated engines, and extra fuel capacity over the 787-8. This ...

I would be interested to know what kind of performance guarantees are in the sales contracts that Airbus has signed with its customers for the A350.
It seems you will never know unless you either work in Airbus or at the airlines.
A333 vs A332, yes, over 1000km less range, but the A333 carries ...

I would be interested to know what kind of performance guarantees are in the sales contracts that Airbus has signed with its customers for the A350.

According to Wikipedia the difference is 400 KM between the A350 models. Still 600 Km is not that much and the range of the A350-900 is the same as the A350-1000. Maybe Airbus updated the figures. The A330-300 has a range that is 2,000 KM less then the A330-200 with max passengers. The a340-300 has ...

The published specs on the A350 models don't make sense to me. All three models have the same wing but maximum take of weights from 540 to 650 thousand pounds. All three models have the same maximum fuel capacity but the ranges are within 300 nm. The Boeing 787 on the other hand has a smaller wing ...

The 777 cabin is about 9 inches wider then the A350XWB. If 10 abreast in the 777 is tight it would be downright painfull in the A350!! I thought the seats in a 747-400 I flew in last year at 10 abreast were a little tight. Especially on a 12 hour flight to Manilla.

Both the A350 and 787 have been ...

Just as a matter of interest, Emirates' 777 seats are ten abreast in Economy, 3-4-3. They do have 33 inch seat pitch, which is a little better than many.

http://tinyurl.com/2sk78p

283 seats on a 777-200, WOW!! The economy seats are 17 inches wide, smaller then on a 747 with 10 abreast. I can ...

The reason the 787 carries less passengers then the A350 is the A350 has a bigger wing with more area and can carry more weight. The fuselages are within 9 inches of each other. Even though the A350 is 9 inches widder they still can't do 10 abreast (comfortably). A 787 that is as long as the A350 ...

I doubt Boeing will stretch the 787 anything more than the -10, it will probably need much more supporting structures to be a spaghetti, and then go overweight like the A340-600..

The fuselage of the A350 is only about 9 inches wider then the 787. Therefore I see no reason why Boeing can't make a ...

7 As for the A350-1000, that plane seems like a logical replacement for any operators of the 773ER. Here, Airbus could develop an advantage over Boeing, if it develops a plane that could carry up to 350 pax, over 8,000nm. I know Qantas would love a plane that could do that. Non stop service from ...

The 747-8I can carry up to 467 passengers 8,000nm. This performance might even be improved a bit by Boeing as the design of the 747-8I won't be frozen until the end of the year. I really think that the 747-8I will sell more, but the freighter version will keep the line open for the foreseeable ...

The 787-10 is more of an A350-900 and 777-200 size aircraft. The problem with Y3 is that it would not only replace the 777-300 but kill the 747-8I as well. I don't think Boeing will want to kill the just redesigned 747 just yet. I think that Boeing could do a Y2.5. That is use the 787 fuselage with ...

I would think the maintanance requirements on a panel on frame built aircraft would be more then on a one piece barrel built aircraft.
How would Airbus do an A320 replacement? Would they use the panel on frame like the A350, or the barrel like on the 787? If Boeing could come up with a 737 ...

I think Boeing has already made back their investment on the 747-8 in just the Freighter version alone. For a relativly small investment Boeing has put a lot of pressure on Airbus to discount the A380 more then they normally would to keep from losing sales to the 747-8I. I don't think it matters if ...