|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 9, 2015 18:22:55 GMT 1
How big is the margin of the GTF over similarly sized shafted engine?
Would the A320NEO engines also be suitable for A340-200/300?
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 9, 2015 17:14:30 GMT 1
Is it likely that developing A380-800NEO/A380-900NEO would be cheaper than developing A340-500/A340-600? After all, unlike A340-200/300, the A380-800 wing is good to remain in use, and A380-800NEO unlike A340-500 keeps an existing fuselage length... Maybe, but I don't think it makes sense to speculate on costs before we know what Airbus actually intends to do. It takes time for Airbus to come out with what they have chosen. That´s why I´m speculating what their options might be.
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 8, 2015 8:28:01 GMT 1
Is it likely that developing A380-800NEO/A380-900NEO would be cheaper than developing A340-500/A340-600? After all, unlike A340-200/300, the A380-800 wing is good to remain in use, and A380-800NEO unlike A340-500 keeps an existing fuselage length...
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 7, 2015 7:00:05 GMT 1
Yes, I checked - Emirates has little use for extra range. Do you want a demonstration?
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 6, 2015 22:13:26 GMT 1
How many of the 200 need to be A380-900NEO in order for Airbus to launch both A380-800NEO and A380-900NEO?
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 5, 2015 20:35:04 GMT 1
For comparison: CS100 before the discovered and as yet unspecified range increase: 2950 nm, takeoff distance 1463 m CS100 at "urban" weights, also without range increase: 1700 nm, takeoff distance 1219 m A318, old wing: 3100 nm, takeoff distance 1828 m A318, sharklets: 3200 nm A319OEO, old wing: 3600 nm, takeoff distance 2164 m A319OEO, sharklets: 3700 nm A320OEO, old wing: 3100 nm, takeoff distance 2090 m A320OEO, sharklets: 3300 nm A321OEO, old wing: 3000 nm, takeoff distance 2560 m A321OEO, sharklets: 3200 nm B737-600, old wing: 3050 nm, takeoff distance 1750 m B737-600, winglets: 3225 nm B737-700, old wing: 3365 nm, takeoff distance 1600 m B737-700, winglets: 3440 nm B737-800, old wing: 3060 nm, takeoff distance 2400 m B737-800, winglets: 3115 nm MD-87: 2370 nm, takeoff distance 2300 m E1-190AR: 2400 nm, takeoff distance 2056 m E1-195AR: 2200 nm, takeoff distance 2179 m A319NEO: 4200 nm A320NEO: 3700 nm A321NEO: 3650 nm A321NEOLR: 4000 nm B737MAX7: 3800 nm B737MAX8: 3620 nm B737MAX9: 3595 nm E2-190: 2800 nm, takeoff distance 1800 m E2-195: 2000 nm, takeoff distance 1950 m
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 3, 2015 21:23:10 GMT 1
So, a significant range bump, to be disclosed in Paris.
Quite independent of that, how much range bump does Odyssey get out of their lighter payload?
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 1, 2015 14:25:50 GMT 1
There is not going to be an A380R. I think any -900 variant is always going to be a pretty straighforward stretch of the current -800 variant. As far as I know, the only modifications needed are additional brakes on the main landing gears. I dont think that a wing-engine combination has to go through additional certification for a stretch variant, so I believe developing a -900 will be pretty cheap and straight forward. I think there's a chance of seeing the -900 around 2020 or maybe a little later. The developments already tested for A380-800F: - MTOW bump
- Engine thrust increase
- Missing brakes
Correct?
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 1, 2015 12:35:27 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by chornedsnorkack on Mar 1, 2015 11:11:40 GMT 1
I think that EIS of the A380NEO is mainly dictated by the availability of the RR Advance engine. Does A380NEO absolutely need to wait for RR Advance, or can a useful NEO be made with Trent XWB engines?
|
|