It seems that although the A350 is a great new plane, it might be a 2nd choice, behind the Dreamliner. Maybe the 787 to the A350 is the same as the A320 to the 737 was?
http://today.reuters.com/business/newsA ... LFC-DC.XML
A350 needs revision?
Moderator: Latest news team
That's not very surprising. Airbus was caught off guard by the 787 and reacted too hastily. In fact, no one including Boeing could have predicted the recent raise of the oil price, which explains most of the sudden attraction of the airlines for the 787.
But it's true, just as everyone is getting tired of Boeing's re-use of the 707 cabin section (727, 737, 757...), it's may be time for Airbus to go back to innovation and "set new standards" (their motto).
But Airbus could just as well take their time, just as Boeing did when the A332 appeared and litterally stole all the orders from the 767.
It took 5 years for Boeing to decide on the 787. But then again, this is a different situation, because Airbus has in fact launched a new competing aircraft but it's not (yet?) a hot selling one...
But it's true, just as everyone is getting tired of Boeing's re-use of the 707 cabin section (727, 737, 757...), it's may be time for Airbus to go back to innovation and "set new standards" (their motto).
But Airbus could just as well take their time, just as Boeing did when the A332 appeared and litterally stole all the orders from the 767.
It took 5 years for Boeing to decide on the 787. But then again, this is a different situation, because Airbus has in fact launched a new competing aircraft but it's not (yet?) a hot selling one...
I have been saying this for some time, the A350 will not be a success. Note that the in depth articles in this series reference it as being a A300 derivative, which it is. You cannot compete in this market segment successfully with that sort of design.
What’s got to have everyone really worries is Airbus is becoming so non competitive, that Boeing will then not have to compete on price. Its no wonder the leasing companies are so upset. Note also that they refer to Airbus being down to 25% market share.
The cause is the Airbus inferiority complex, in that they locked in on Boeing success being attributed to the 747. While significant, Boeing success was based on supply very solid aircraft.
Airbus achieved its success by offering more than Boeing was with the A300 series, and the A320 series. They never lost the inferiority complex, and continued to insist that to be respected (whatever that means) aircraft manufacture until they matched of exceeded Boeing every model level.
Hence the A380, sucking huge resources out of the company, worse than financial, engineering and RSD resources. So now they have no answer to Boeing, either in the composites nor the move to electrically operated aircraft (which is not often mentions, but that’s another huge change).
You have an enormous problem when offer an aircraft (A380) and then the customers have to bring it to their attention it does not meet noise standard for the airports its going to fly into. You can add onto the weight issue (still no figures) which cost 1.3 Billion extra, and the interior debacle where they blamed the customers, and last minute issues like the wing breaking before design limits are reached.
Two agencies (Europe and US) have to sign off on whatever fix they come up with (and more weight will have to be added to correct that)
Still to be heard from as well are fuel burn figures. So, instead of getting those, you have your lead aircraft running around the world on demo flights.
Note that if you read all the comments, the prediction is for 300-400 A380 sales. Boeing is just hitting 1600 747 sales after 36 years. It will probably sell another 300 before production ceases, but it has a unique spot in air freight, and certainly fills a passenger gap.
Strategy wise it does not have to be a major passenger success, as it will act as a foil to the A380, keeping its price down when one is sold, which means that the break even point gets pushed further down the line. At this point they may not reach break even.
Boeing also set itself up very nicely with the technology of the 787 not only to replace the 737, but to reach down further and compete in the 90 passenger segment. With the flexible engine mounting technology, they could come out with the 737RS with either an interim engine choice, or develop and fly it with existing engines while the final ones are worked out.
Comments about Boeing not knowing this would be a huge success are naïve at best. Boeing has been working on the issues a lot longer than they have been given credit for by a pundits.
There was a lot of laughing about Boeing and the Sonic Cruiser design. Many who gave Airbus kudos for their designs, lambasted Boeing for proposing it. While it was not successful, it did get a lot of airline interest, and Boeing took that, the feedback of what would work and was needed, as well as the technology in it, and proposed the 7E7. That did garner extremely serious interest.
Boeing predicted 200 sales the first year, and while they missed it (and Airbus tried to jump on the bandwagon with the A350), they did have those sales, getting the contracts signed took more time. Note that North West airlines got some of the very first slots. From a struggling US carrier, that meant a huge amount (not to mention a solid Airbus customer).
As the leading aircraft company, Boeing has always had to be careful with its image. I remember the comments abut the ducted fan offering. Rather than embrace it, it got knocked down (remember Airbus originally could not sell any aircraft either). Circumstances gave them an opening, and they proved that what they had to offer was more than competitive, but only because of need. Airlines previously do not like new technology, though that is changing as well.
Also note that Airbus has made some serious allegations on Boeing use of composites, not based on the merits, but trying to knock Boeing down, when they can’t compete. If that got out of hand, you could have the worlds finest aircraft, and no customers.
Airbus has put themselves in a worse position than Boeing was in. A whole series of aircraft that are non competitive, cannot be brought up to a competitive standard (A330/A350/A340 as well as the A380 which offers nothing but size, no aeronautical advances of any kind). The A320 will be on that same list as soon as the 737RS aircraft are offered. Frankly, by the time they figure it out, they may be so far behind, they cannot recover. Boeing is not going to be standing still.
That leaves Airbus with one aircraft Boeing cannot match, and they can live with that.
What’s got to have everyone really worries is Airbus is becoming so non competitive, that Boeing will then not have to compete on price. Its no wonder the leasing companies are so upset. Note also that they refer to Airbus being down to 25% market share.
The cause is the Airbus inferiority complex, in that they locked in on Boeing success being attributed to the 747. While significant, Boeing success was based on supply very solid aircraft.
Airbus achieved its success by offering more than Boeing was with the A300 series, and the A320 series. They never lost the inferiority complex, and continued to insist that to be respected (whatever that means) aircraft manufacture until they matched of exceeded Boeing every model level.
Hence the A380, sucking huge resources out of the company, worse than financial, engineering and RSD resources. So now they have no answer to Boeing, either in the composites nor the move to electrically operated aircraft (which is not often mentions, but that’s another huge change).
You have an enormous problem when offer an aircraft (A380) and then the customers have to bring it to their attention it does not meet noise standard for the airports its going to fly into. You can add onto the weight issue (still no figures) which cost 1.3 Billion extra, and the interior debacle where they blamed the customers, and last minute issues like the wing breaking before design limits are reached.
Two agencies (Europe and US) have to sign off on whatever fix they come up with (and more weight will have to be added to correct that)
Still to be heard from as well are fuel burn figures. So, instead of getting those, you have your lead aircraft running around the world on demo flights.
Note that if you read all the comments, the prediction is for 300-400 A380 sales. Boeing is just hitting 1600 747 sales after 36 years. It will probably sell another 300 before production ceases, but it has a unique spot in air freight, and certainly fills a passenger gap.
Strategy wise it does not have to be a major passenger success, as it will act as a foil to the A380, keeping its price down when one is sold, which means that the break even point gets pushed further down the line. At this point they may not reach break even.
Boeing also set itself up very nicely with the technology of the 787 not only to replace the 737, but to reach down further and compete in the 90 passenger segment. With the flexible engine mounting technology, they could come out with the 737RS with either an interim engine choice, or develop and fly it with existing engines while the final ones are worked out.
Comments about Boeing not knowing this would be a huge success are naïve at best. Boeing has been working on the issues a lot longer than they have been given credit for by a pundits.
There was a lot of laughing about Boeing and the Sonic Cruiser design. Many who gave Airbus kudos for their designs, lambasted Boeing for proposing it. While it was not successful, it did get a lot of airline interest, and Boeing took that, the feedback of what would work and was needed, as well as the technology in it, and proposed the 7E7. That did garner extremely serious interest.
Boeing predicted 200 sales the first year, and while they missed it (and Airbus tried to jump on the bandwagon with the A350), they did have those sales, getting the contracts signed took more time. Note that North West airlines got some of the very first slots. From a struggling US carrier, that meant a huge amount (not to mention a solid Airbus customer).
As the leading aircraft company, Boeing has always had to be careful with its image. I remember the comments abut the ducted fan offering. Rather than embrace it, it got knocked down (remember Airbus originally could not sell any aircraft either). Circumstances gave them an opening, and they proved that what they had to offer was more than competitive, but only because of need. Airlines previously do not like new technology, though that is changing as well.
Also note that Airbus has made some serious allegations on Boeing use of composites, not based on the merits, but trying to knock Boeing down, when they can’t compete. If that got out of hand, you could have the worlds finest aircraft, and no customers.
Airbus has put themselves in a worse position than Boeing was in. A whole series of aircraft that are non competitive, cannot be brought up to a competitive standard (A330/A350/A340 as well as the A380 which offers nothing but size, no aeronautical advances of any kind). The A320 will be on that same list as soon as the 737RS aircraft are offered. Frankly, by the time they figure it out, they may be so far behind, they cannot recover. Boeing is not going to be standing still.
That leaves Airbus with one aircraft Boeing cannot match, and they can live with that.
I think you have hit the nail on the head!That leaves Airbus with one aircraft Boeing cannot match, and they can live with that.
My own personal belief is Airbus and in particular Noel Forgeard were of the same mistaken opinion about what the market wanted, which was reflected in the the poor sales of the A380, and to a lesser degree the A350.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... ing29.html
Boeing has no ego problems to deal with, they concentrated on listening to customers, developing aircraft to fill that need.
The fuel price crisis only increased the need for economical aircraft, and the 777 came on like gangbusters. So now ILFC and GECAS have spoken out, and told Airbus forget the A350 and come up with something totally new and competitive with the 787, and if Airbus bites the bullet, spends the money, and gets it right, they may have a chance of getting some orders, late as they may be.
Its very rare for Aircraft buyers the size of those two to air their wishes so publicly, and lay it on the table what they want.
Airbus has a choice to make, Lead, Follow, or get out of the way.
There are no strangers in the world, just friends we have yet to meet.
-
smokejumper
- Posts: 1033
- Joined: 21 Oct 2005, 00:00
- Location: Northern Virginia USA
Airbus has been extraordinarily successful in selling planes; Boeing has always been best at designing planes. Traditionally, Boeing delivers more than they promise and they generally exceed contract specifications in regards to performance and economy. I feel that this is the case in the A-350 vs. B-787 situation. The B-787 is about 10 toms lighter than the A-350 and is made of advanced materials, which are lower maintenance and be better able to resist damage. The B-787 will be able to use less thrust and fuel to take-off, climb and cruise, due to its lighter weight.
Airbus is consuming massive amounts of cash in developing the A-380, a plane that has a limited market (one writer noted that Boeing took 36 years to sell 1,600 747’s). There is little reason to expect Airbus to do as well since there are only a limited number of routes that can use its capacity. It’s a beautiful plane and a real technical achievement, but it will not be a marketing success. Only airlines that carry very heavy passenger loads between 2 city pairs or just must have the biggest plane will buy it.
The A-350 is too little, too late. Airbus dismissed the 787 until they saw she writing on the wall and then hurried up to get a competitive product. After 4 false starts, they finally settled on an offering that was accepted. Many airlines have evaluated both planes (A-350 and B-787) and the consensus seems to be a bet on Boeing. Airbus can overcome the A-350’s operating deficit by selling it on the basis of price (not profit). They are now in a quandary. They have contracts for the A-350 with deliveries to start in 2011 (if they are not late) and this program will cost billions of Euro’s. If they cancel the contracts they will incur contract penalties and loss of a customer base; if they continue, they will have to sell at lower prices than Boeing; if they finish and deliver the A-350 to existing customers and simultaneously develop an advanced plane, they will pay through the nose.
Airbus is fortunate to have so many willing European taxpayers to pay their bills!
Airbus is consuming massive amounts of cash in developing the A-380, a plane that has a limited market (one writer noted that Boeing took 36 years to sell 1,600 747’s). There is little reason to expect Airbus to do as well since there are only a limited number of routes that can use its capacity. It’s a beautiful plane and a real technical achievement, but it will not be a marketing success. Only airlines that carry very heavy passenger loads between 2 city pairs or just must have the biggest plane will buy it.
The A-350 is too little, too late. Airbus dismissed the 787 until they saw she writing on the wall and then hurried up to get a competitive product. After 4 false starts, they finally settled on an offering that was accepted. Many airlines have evaluated both planes (A-350 and B-787) and the consensus seems to be a bet on Boeing. Airbus can overcome the A-350’s operating deficit by selling it on the basis of price (not profit). They are now in a quandary. They have contracts for the A-350 with deliveries to start in 2011 (if they are not late) and this program will cost billions of Euro’s. If they cancel the contracts they will incur contract penalties and loss of a customer base; if they continue, they will have to sell at lower prices than Boeing; if they finish and deliver the A-350 to existing customers and simultaneously develop an advanced plane, they will pay through the nose.
Airbus is fortunate to have so many willing European taxpayers to pay their bills!
That, indeed, was their BIGGEST mistake. After preaching that they "replaced" the 737 with the more technologically advanced A320, and somewhat replacing the 747 market with the A380, they neglected to compete in one of the most popular wide-body markets around!! How could an aircraft manufacturer that made it's success of beating up older Boeing designs, turn right around, and neglect their own product line?!?! Oops indeed.The A-350 is too little, too late. Airbus dismissed the 787 until they saw she writing on the wall and then hurried up to get a competitive product.
:shakehead:"What's this button do?? I don't know, push it and find out................."
Airbus' mistake was made by concentrating too much on the A380. When the A380 (A3XX) was first designed, in the 90's, the airline industry was 'booming' so to speak. Then, more people were flying than ever. Airlines like American, United, British Airways, and Northwest were making record profits. Now, with increased fuel costs, increased presence by low-fare airlines, and security concerns, very few major western airlines are turning a sizeable profit. The A380 was simply the wrong plane at the wrong time. Airbus didn't respond to the market quick enough.
Boeing foresaw the problems I previously mentioned and responded quickly with the 787. Airlines love the efficency of the 787 and it is selling like hot cakes. Boeing even had a record number of orders in 2005.
Do I think it is the end for Airbus? No. Airbus had their time on top and it is Boeing's turn now. I am sure, in the future, things will pick up for Airbus.
Boeing foresaw the problems I previously mentioned and responded quickly with the 787. Airlines love the efficency of the 787 and it is selling like hot cakes. Boeing even had a record number of orders in 2005.
Do I think it is the end for Airbus? No. Airbus had their time on top and it is Boeing's turn now. I am sure, in the future, things will pick up for Airbus.
Onward and Upward...
Do I think it is the end for Airbus? No. Airbus had their time on top and it is Boeing's turn now. I am sure, in the future, things will pick up for Airbus.
It's definitely cyclical, Airbus will indeed have their time in the spotlight again. By the way, nice to hear from you again.
"What's this button do?? I don't know, push it and find out................."
A major decision will be whether they rebuild the A350 again, because if they do, everything changes, everythign will be delayed for Airbus including the A345/346Enhanced due in 2011, will probably be scraped... But then there won't be a A340 replacer until at least 2014 or something like that (since the A350 will be delayed another year to 2012), leaving the 777 with virtually no competition for another 8-9 years, but of course when the new range of Airbus comes, they will shine.
But do you think they'll do that? It's a huge bet, it will be a live or die decision, if their new range of aircrafts doesn't sell as well as they expect, they'll probably go bankrupt or something having had spent so much money on new products, and of course they must save enough resources on the A320 replacer..
But do you think they'll do that? It's a huge bet, it will be a live or die decision, if their new range of aircrafts doesn't sell as well as they expect, they'll probably go bankrupt or something having had spent so much money on new products, and of course they must save enough resources on the A320 replacer..
They already made that decision when they decided to develope and build the A380. The question is, will it pay off??But do you think they'll do that? It's a huge bet, it will be a live or die decision
In those 8-9 years that the 777 would be unchallenged, that would be a good time for Boeing to start development of a newer 777 (perhaps a composite version) with their capital gained from the 787. That's thinking ahead."What's this button do?? I don't know, push it and find out................."
Pretty telling here, I would call it the final nail for the A340. They will sell a few.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... tes30.html
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... tes30.html
The problem for Airbus is that while the business is partly cyclical, it is also an opportunity situation.
What gave Airbus the opportunity originally was not only better products, but a failure on Boeings part that let them into the game (ego, hubris on pricing, attitude and production issues).
Boeing has learned that lesson, once you get ahead, stay ahead. In this case that means not only product, but listening to what your customers need (the 787-10 for instance) and giving them that.
Airbus can change their approach, but they have no product. Getting competitive product for just the 787 is 4-6 years away, if they start now. In the meantime, the Boeing juggernaut is going to be hard at work with the 737RS aircraft, which means Airbus becomes non competitive in the last area. They can’t even come out with a derivative in a 4 years.
They are competing with a firm that is coming out with 4 all new aircraft (787 versions), and something like 4 derivatives of existing (777 and 747), plus designs for 737 replacement on the hot plate (and Airbus is fooling themselves if they think this is not a full fledged hot project), as well as future work on the 777 replacement. They will be toying with 747-A380 stuff as well, though I don’t think you will see anything there in 15 years.
Airbus can and is getting into a position where they just can’t compete (and they no longer can get complete launch subsided, and probably not what they are presently getting).
The A350 has been mostly used by airlines and leasing companies to keep the 787 prices down.
The areas they will sell in is where someone needs an aircraft now. Boeing is still selling 767s, not because it’s a great airplane, but because it has slots available in the time frame needed. The A330 is in the same boat, and will sell for 4 more years.
My next prediction is that Foregard is going to get thrown out.
What gave Airbus the opportunity originally was not only better products, but a failure on Boeings part that let them into the game (ego, hubris on pricing, attitude and production issues).
Boeing has learned that lesson, once you get ahead, stay ahead. In this case that means not only product, but listening to what your customers need (the 787-10 for instance) and giving them that.
Airbus can change their approach, but they have no product. Getting competitive product for just the 787 is 4-6 years away, if they start now. In the meantime, the Boeing juggernaut is going to be hard at work with the 737RS aircraft, which means Airbus becomes non competitive in the last area. They can’t even come out with a derivative in a 4 years.
They are competing with a firm that is coming out with 4 all new aircraft (787 versions), and something like 4 derivatives of existing (777 and 747), plus designs for 737 replacement on the hot plate (and Airbus is fooling themselves if they think this is not a full fledged hot project), as well as future work on the 777 replacement. They will be toying with 747-A380 stuff as well, though I don’t think you will see anything there in 15 years.
Airbus can and is getting into a position where they just can’t compete (and they no longer can get complete launch subsided, and probably not what they are presently getting).
The A350 has been mostly used by airlines and leasing companies to keep the 787 prices down.
The areas they will sell in is where someone needs an aircraft now. Boeing is still selling 767s, not because it’s a great airplane, but because it has slots available in the time frame needed. The A330 is in the same boat, and will sell for 4 more years.
My next prediction is that Foregard is going to get thrown out.
I think we are getting ahead of ourselves here. Nobody can tell what the aviation industry will be like in the next decade. One thing that can be foreseen is that if Airbus doesn't regroup on the A350, they will not be nearly as competitive in the future as they were previously.
"What's this button do?? I don't know, push it and find out................."
I think we should all come back to our senses here, and look back a little.
The airline business is a cyclical one. And in the past the fortunes of Boeing and Airbus have alternated without their disappearing.
When the A330-300 and even more the A330-200 where launched, orders for the 767 almost came to a stop.
Boeing then chose to wait 10 years before they could offer both a appropriate competitor to the 330 family and a replacement for their 767.
In the meantime, they launched the 764, a stretched version boasting the raked wingtips for the first time (and today in use on the 777-300ER and -200LR). The market response to the 764 was lukewarm (less than 100 orders, mainly from Delta and Continental, who replaced their ageing L-1011 and DC-10. Not what you can call a success, even for a derivative aircraft).
Boieng relied during that period on the (then new) 777 and the ageing 767.
At the time, no one said Boeing was dead because they were out of that 200-280 passenger segment!
So what's the problem if Airbus decides to be late in competing with the 787?
Airbus's only mistake in my opinion is their haste in replying to the 787. They could tell the airlines to wait another 5 years after the 787 and get a real revolutionnary aircraft. Just as Boeing did 10 years ago with the 767, they could continue to supply the A330 which remains an excellent machine (according to the latest Airline Business issue, there's a shortage of A330 on the market), at lower prices than the 787, before they launch a really innovative machine.
And even if the 787 books orders, some airlines would replace them 5 years later with a newer Airbus design (just like SIA did with their 343).
Both Boeing and Airbus have proven they build excellent aircraft.
So I think it's time to stop using such inappropriately dramatic expressions such as "the 773-ER is tha final nail in the coffin of the A346" or "Airbus will disappear".
It would ensure to keep the level of this forum high.
Thanks
The airline business is a cyclical one. And in the past the fortunes of Boeing and Airbus have alternated without their disappearing.
When the A330-300 and even more the A330-200 where launched, orders for the 767 almost came to a stop.
Boeing then chose to wait 10 years before they could offer both a appropriate competitor to the 330 family and a replacement for their 767.
In the meantime, they launched the 764, a stretched version boasting the raked wingtips for the first time (and today in use on the 777-300ER and -200LR). The market response to the 764 was lukewarm (less than 100 orders, mainly from Delta and Continental, who replaced their ageing L-1011 and DC-10. Not what you can call a success, even for a derivative aircraft).
Boieng relied during that period on the (then new) 777 and the ageing 767.
At the time, no one said Boeing was dead because they were out of that 200-280 passenger segment!
So what's the problem if Airbus decides to be late in competing with the 787?
Airbus's only mistake in my opinion is their haste in replying to the 787. They could tell the airlines to wait another 5 years after the 787 and get a real revolutionnary aircraft. Just as Boeing did 10 years ago with the 767, they could continue to supply the A330 which remains an excellent machine (according to the latest Airline Business issue, there's a shortage of A330 on the market), at lower prices than the 787, before they launch a really innovative machine.
And even if the 787 books orders, some airlines would replace them 5 years later with a newer Airbus design (just like SIA did with their 343).
Both Boeing and Airbus have proven they build excellent aircraft.
So I think it's time to stop using such inappropriately dramatic expressions such as "the 773-ER is tha final nail in the coffin of the A346" or "Airbus will disappear".
It would ensure to keep the level of this forum high.
Thanks
I totally agree that delaying the A350 but in return, get a brand new design is not a problem, 1 or 2 years, or even 3 years is nothing much for an airliner's life as long as it is competitive... but the thing is whether they'll put money into it... i mean they have gone very far with the current A350, with the interior mock-up unveiling tomorrow.. if they re-do it, what has been done will be pretty much an expense for nothing... probably some new technologies can be retained but a lot will need to be done again or modified..