Aviation24.be

There might be a grain of truth of what CX said, but then again, as these things (orders/deals) go, perhaps they just come in spurts?

Ah, but the economics may have 'changed' in the sense that the realistic seat counts have gone down (true with the A380 and 747I) which in some way makes it more ...

bits44 wrote:Look to Dubai for an announcement on the dash 10!

When bits?

Afterall a plane 5 years newer is 5 years better, and after the production slots are filled up in the time gap, the advantage of the early plane is gone.

Not necessarily, it may simply be 5 years late, just that and nothing more, or a poorly designed plane 5 years newer is a new plane that is ...

coming good now

This week, interesting indeed!

If this following article is indeed true, US Airways may indeed give Airbus a huge sigh of relief:

Airbus finalizing $7 billion order for 30 A350s
http://tinyurl.com/37q932

If I am right, Airbus is going to have to re-target as well as re do the A350

You're suggesting Airbus can't afford not to restart (again) the A350 when almost all observers say Airbus can't afford any further delays after handing over to Boeing a 5 year head start.

I disagree with this ...

All the comparative discussion between the XWB, 787 and 777 got me wondering, simply put, is the primary difference in the pax carrying capacity between the XWB and 787 cabin length (since the difference in width could hardly translate to additional seats)? Would someone help straighten me out on ...

The wide gap the article is referring to relates to the 'gap' between commitments and orders for the XWB vs the previous A350 design. See the insert titled 'Nailing Down Orders' in the article.

In my view, that gap represents the 'show me proof' attitude Airbus' customers have taken towards the 350 ...

Well, here's new breaking news from the WSJ!

Airbus Faces Wide Gap in A350 Orders (ILFC orders 50+ 787s topping it's order book over 600 planes)
http://tinyurl.com/38omxp

It's very interesting to hear from the horse's mouth what Airbus' thinking was when the 787 was in development. It helps explain why Airbus did what they did, essentially re-engining the A330 with the first iteration of the A350. Why spend the big bucks to develop a completely new plane if most of ...

Being at least five years behind, Airbus has already been in the dust wrt that cat fight.

CHICAGO, March 15 (Reuters) - An internal debate at US Airways Group (LCC.N: Quote, Profile , Research) over whether to proceed with an order for 20 Airbus wide-body A350s spotlights an increasingly precarious relationship between Airbus and one of its most loyal U.S. customers.

http://tinyurl ...

From a Wikipedia entry for Qatar Airways:

In the ATP Berlin travel fair held in March 2007, Qatar Airways stated its intent to order up to 80 Airbus A350's, an increase of 20 aircraft over their previous intention.

I agree that the firm contract will be fixed at the Paris Airshow.

It will ...

I think you will find this is merely a LOI with an expected firm committment at Paris.

Ruscoe

That may well be, but QA has pretty much stuck with Airbus on the A350 through thick or thin, despite the very public, but very much deserved bellyaching (to spur Airbus on). I've little doubt QA will ...

Today Boeing (NYSE: BA - News) celebrated roll out of the first vertical fin for the company's all-new commercial airplane, the 787 Dreamliner. Manufactured and assembled at the Composite Manufacturing Center in Frederickson, Wash., the vertical fin is the largest primary structure of the 787 ...

It's deja vu all over again! Nevertheless, it is good news for Airbus. For QA, it's another roll of the dice, for their sakes and Airbus', I hope Airbus gets it right this time.

smokejumper wrote:
It is a good looking airplane.

Those "winglets" look awefully small for its fuselage!

But in the "real" world, no one pays anyone to acquire jumbo jets. Heck, not even Airbus is "paying" the airliners for A380s even after accounting for the late penalties. Nevertheless, your point is taken.

If I understand what I read correctly on the last paragraph, then I think we're in agreement.

At a low enough price, even a Boeing 707-360B could be profitable! (Well, maybe the price would have to be in the negative numbers.) The higher fuel costs would be offset by the price.

I can't speak to how well Finnair manages their business, but I can't agree with the above statement for this ...

This year's Paris Air Show is between June 18-24 2007.

http://www.paris-air-show.com/en/index. ... =2&page=21