Hello I am Ovostar, and i am new, i am 24yrs old, i am from Geneva, sWitzerland.
So i have questions about the Airbus A350.
What is it ?
Is this the response to the 787 or the 777 ?
Are airbus really trying to completely beating boeing ?
OTher question, Are BOeing still continuing to build some 747-400 ? if yes, when are they going to stop ?
Thank you
Airbus A350 (and some 787, 747, 380 questions)
Moderator: Latest news team
Airbus A350 (and some 787, 747, 380 questions)
Last edited by Ovostar on 10 Jul 2005, 00:19, edited 1 time in total.
Hi Ovostar,
Welcome to Luchtzak!
First an answer to your questions!
The A350 is a direct response to Boeing's 787, although Airbus initially were not going to respond to Boeings 787, they did decide to respond after careful thought and consideration. Although Airbus has offered the A350 to customers, the decision to actually build it has not been made by the Board of directors at EADS and Airbus.
This decision will be made some time in September or October, as you may be aware Airbus has run into some problems with the A380 and from what I have read in trade journals, they are very reluctant to proceed with the A350 until all problems have been solved with the A380.
As for the 747! well its very much alive and kicking, a newer version called the 747ADV equipped with almost the same engines as the 787 and with new composite component's will be introduced within the next three weeks. Boeing reportedly has in excess of 40 preorders and include some very major carriers, you should be aware this Aircraft is not intended to compete with the A380, but rather to fill a gap between the 777 and the A380, as well as Freight operations.
Glad to have you aboard, and welcome again.
KT
Welcome to Luchtzak!
First an answer to your questions!
The A350 is a direct response to Boeing's 787, although Airbus initially were not going to respond to Boeings 787, they did decide to respond after careful thought and consideration. Although Airbus has offered the A350 to customers, the decision to actually build it has not been made by the Board of directors at EADS and Airbus.
This decision will be made some time in September or October, as you may be aware Airbus has run into some problems with the A380 and from what I have read in trade journals, they are very reluctant to proceed with the A350 until all problems have been solved with the A380.
As for the 747! well its very much alive and kicking, a newer version called the 747ADV equipped with almost the same engines as the 787 and with new composite component's will be introduced within the next three weeks. Boeing reportedly has in excess of 40 preorders and include some very major carriers, you should be aware this Aircraft is not intended to compete with the A380, but rather to fill a gap between the 777 and the A380, as well as Freight operations.
Glad to have you aboard, and welcome again.
KT
Hey, Thanks for your welcomes!
I never heared of the 747ADV . Is it a 747-400 ?
What do you mean in a few weeks ?
I thought that years ago, Boeing abandonned the ideas of doing new versions lie the 747-500X and the 747-600X....
And About Airbus, why are they doing some publicity about the A350, if they are not really sure to build it ?
I never heared of the 747ADV . Is it a 747-400 ?
What do you mean in a few weeks ?
I thought that years ago, Boeing abandonned the ideas of doing new versions lie the 747-500X and the 747-600X....
And About Airbus, why are they doing some publicity about the A350, if they are not really sure to build it ?
Hi again!
you're correct the 747ADV is a variant of the 747-400 with fuselage extensions and composite control surfaces, among the reasons Boeing could not make up their minds about extending the 747 were, the plane was inefficient, the market for that type of Aircraft was declining, at least on the passenger side of things, their own 777 was stealing orders from the 747, and along with 911 and a bevy of other things, they were about to close the line down.
It was actually Airbus that prompted Boeing to re-exam the useful life of the 747, and could it be improved, enough carriers were interested enough to make Boeing sit up and take a second look. With not a lot of money invested to make a huge improvement in a proven Aircraft and new technologies available to make it very economical to operate and buy, it has reinvented its self. Boeing announced at the Paris Airshow that they had approval in principal to proceed with the new version, and from what I have heard from people at Boeing its going ahead.
by the way you may notice there is somewhat of a regional favoritism directed to some posts in this forum, just disregard them, we are all here because we love aviation.
you're correct the 747ADV is a variant of the 747-400 with fuselage extensions and composite control surfaces, among the reasons Boeing could not make up their minds about extending the 747 were, the plane was inefficient, the market for that type of Aircraft was declining, at least on the passenger side of things, their own 777 was stealing orders from the 747, and along with 911 and a bevy of other things, they were about to close the line down.
It was actually Airbus that prompted Boeing to re-exam the useful life of the 747, and could it be improved, enough carriers were interested enough to make Boeing sit up and take a second look. With not a lot of money invested to make a huge improvement in a proven Aircraft and new technologies available to make it very economical to operate and buy, it has reinvented its self. Boeing announced at the Paris Airshow that they had approval in principal to proceed with the new version, and from what I have heard from people at Boeing its going ahead.
by the way you may notice there is somewhat of a regional favoritism directed to some posts in this forum, just disregard them, we are all here because we love aviation.
There is currently no passager version of the B747-400 in production since Boeing doesn’t have any on order, last one was for China Airlines. But the CARGO version is going in a slow rate and the production will continue past year 2010 after the latest order for 6 planes.
Basically the A350 is offering the same thing as the B787, but it’s a bit bigger. There are larger windows, special advanced interior, new modern engines, better wing.
BUT the most important is the fact that they can use the design (not parts) of the A380! The hydraulic system is the one that will make the A350 very efficient compare with A330!
There is one thing that still makes the A330-200/300 popular, the PRICE! A350 will be much more expensive and as order are coming in costumers can see that they have to wait long for the A350!
Its NOT about COMPLETELY BEATING, its to SURVIVE! If you don’t offer what the other one has you will loose costumers.
A good example is Mc Douglas, they didn’t come up with similar aircrafts like Airbus and Boeing and within 10 years they where gone!
Welcome to this forum, by the way!
Have a nice week end!
Basically the A350 is offering the same thing as the B787, but it’s a bit bigger. There are larger windows, special advanced interior, new modern engines, better wing.
BUT the most important is the fact that they can use the design (not parts) of the A380! The hydraulic system is the one that will make the A350 very efficient compare with A330!
There is one thing that still makes the A330-200/300 popular, the PRICE! A350 will be much more expensive and as order are coming in costumers can see that they have to wait long for the A350!
Its NOT about COMPLETELY BEATING, its to SURVIVE! If you don’t offer what the other one has you will loose costumers.
A good example is Mc Douglas, they didn’t come up with similar aircrafts like Airbus and Boeing and within 10 years they where gone!
Welcome to this forum, by the way!
Have a nice week end!
-
B744skipper
- Posts: 1509
- Joined: 21 Apr 2004, 00:00
First of all, welcome to Luchtzak Ovostar.
What you are asking in principle is why do aircraft manufacturers build and design new planes?
Let's take the A350 as an example. Why does Airbus want to build this aircraft? They want it to compete with the B787 (and partially with the B772). Because when they do not build such a new aircraft, Airbus would loose market shares to Boeing. And stuck with in the future more old technology (the A330 and A340), they would lose a lot of market share for sure.
It's all a race, Boeing builds a better plane then Airbus currently has to offer, so Airbus tries to come up with an aircraft that at least is as good as the plane Boeing has (or will) build. And because they then would both have better planes then the ones they produced before (B767, A330, A340) they will drop those lines and offer the better aircraft (B787, A350) instead. Something that is modern and state of the art nowadays will be aged in about 10-15 years.
You know how this race is called? This race is called competition!
In this topic you can find more information about the Boeing 747-Advanced:
https://www.aviation24.be/postt11451.html
What you are asking in principle is why do aircraft manufacturers build and design new planes?
Let's take the A350 as an example. Why does Airbus want to build this aircraft? They want it to compete with the B787 (and partially with the B772). Because when they do not build such a new aircraft, Airbus would loose market shares to Boeing. And stuck with in the future more old technology (the A330 and A340), they would lose a lot of market share for sure.
It's all a race, Boeing builds a better plane then Airbus currently has to offer, so Airbus tries to come up with an aircraft that at least is as good as the plane Boeing has (or will) build. And because they then would both have better planes then the ones they produced before (B767, A330, A340) they will drop those lines and offer the better aircraft (B787, A350) instead. Something that is modern and state of the art nowadays will be aged in about 10-15 years.
You know how this race is called? This race is called competition!
In this topic you can find more information about the Boeing 747-Advanced:
https://www.aviation24.be/postt11451.html
-
B744skipper
- Posts: 1509
- Joined: 21 Apr 2004, 00:00
I have mentioned the A340, and for me that also includes the A340-600.Ovostar wrote:You didn't mention the Airbus A340-600, which is for me a better aircraft than the 777-200...
And you can find it a better aircraft than the B772, but the airlines do not give a rats ass about that. Airlines look into economics to see which aircraft suits them the best. Btw, the B777-300 and the A340-600 are competing, the A346 does not compete with the B772.
The A350 is smaller than the A346. I don't know about distances, but it flies them a lot more efficiently, wich is what counts for the airlines.Ovostar wrote:I don't get the whole A350 thing, does it fly longer distances thant the a340-600 ?
The plane look so conventional, The 787 has an amazing shape, we can feel an imrpovement,
The 350 seems to have been drawn in just 5 minutes, it;s just an impression hehehe, i know there is a lot of work
About the 'cool' shape of the 787, Boeing canned that. It's just a new 767 now. And airlines don't give a **** about looks, they want the most fuel efficient and best preforming plane...
-
Vinnie-Winnie
- Posts: 955
- Joined: 01 Jul 2004, 00:00
- Location: London
A big welcome Ovostar!
Tell U what thanks to your first few posts I feel that i'm already less interesting than you! By going back to the basics U do ask questions that most of us wouldn't dare to ask out of pride!
Well i'd say that it is nice to like aircrafts for what they look like, but it's even better to look at the economics of it! This influences everything from the quality of your inflight meals to the altitude and speed your aircraft is flying at! Take the concorde for example, amazing plane but its economic model was doomed so at the end it was doomed aswell!
Tell U what thanks to your first few posts I feel that i'm already less interesting than you! By going back to the basics U do ask questions that most of us wouldn't dare to ask out of pride!
Well i'd say that it is nice to like aircrafts for what they look like, but it's even better to look at the economics of it! This influences everything from the quality of your inflight meals to the altitude and speed your aircraft is flying at! Take the concorde for example, amazing plane but its economic model was doomed so at the end it was doomed aswell!
Thank You for your Welcome. SOrry for my basic questions heheh, it;s always like that when you are new in a forum, you ask basic questions,
like when someone new in the starwars message board says as a first message, why does the body of Qui-GOn Ginn doesn;t disappear in the end of episode I ,or to ask in a Beatles forum, is it true that McCatney died in 1966 in a car crash and was replaced by a lookalike ?hehehe.
A Lot of you seems to be big connoisseurs in Airplane , it;s very good to have found this forum. Thank you!
YOu are right about the thing with the airplane shapes, of course! the economic details are the most important thing, if not, i would make a company with Antonov 225 in a passenger configuration and a Belouga with a swimming pool in it heheheh
And concerning the concorde, i think it was not so doomed, because, building the concorde helped them a lot, for the first airbus, they got a lot of knowledge building the concorde. Without the concorde the airbus wouldn;t be airbus as we know it.
and i still believe thaht the concorde was a economic failure because of the americans who did a plot against the concorde
like when someone new in the starwars message board says as a first message, why does the body of Qui-GOn Ginn doesn;t disappear in the end of episode I ,or to ask in a Beatles forum, is it true that McCatney died in 1966 in a car crash and was replaced by a lookalike ?hehehe.
A Lot of you seems to be big connoisseurs in Airplane , it;s very good to have found this forum. Thank you!
YOu are right about the thing with the airplane shapes, of course! the economic details are the most important thing, if not, i would make a company with Antonov 225 in a passenger configuration and a Belouga with a swimming pool in it heheheh
And concerning the concorde, i think it was not so doomed, because, building the concorde helped them a lot, for the first airbus, they got a lot of knowledge building the concorde. Without the concorde the airbus wouldn;t be airbus as we know it.
and i still believe thaht the concorde was a economic failure because of the americans who did a plot against the concorde
-
HorsePower
- Posts: 1589
- Joined: 12 Jan 2005, 00:00
- Location: France
It's right that the americans didn't like Concorde too much, but to my knowledge, they were not responsible of the fuel crisis!Ovostar wrote:... and i still believe that the concorde was a economic failure because of the americans who did a plot against the concorde
That said, I wish you a warm welcome Ovostar, and hope you will enjoy your stay on Luchtzak!
Regards
Seb.
?