Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Jul 14, 2015 15:45:17 GMT 1
Great idea FabienA380. Couple of questions... What is the market for a A350-900LR like aside from SQ's interest. Is SQ looking to convert or exercise their A350 options, and hence may bear a preference to the -900LR? |
|
|
|
Post by peter on Jul 14, 2015 21:58:05 GMT 1
Sounds like SQ wants to operate nonstop SIN-NYC again.... |
|
|
|
Post by stealthmanbob on Jul 14, 2015 23:14:08 GMT 1
I guess an LR version would work by having more First Class / business class / premium economy seats, so less passengers and baggage and less cargo to save weight, replaced by extra fuel tanks ?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jkkw on Jul 15, 2015 6:19:16 GMT 1
Great idea FabienA380. Couple of questions... What is the market for a A350-900LR like aside from SQ's interest. Is SQ looking to convert or exercise their A350 options, and hence may bear a preference to the -900LR? Considering how the 777-200LR has sold, I doubt the market would be that large although from Airbus's perspective, it should be pretty easy to do the LR with low costs of development. A freighter version of the lr might sell quite well though. I feel as if SQ has too many A359s on order (especially when you consider they also have 30 78Js on order) so I wouldn't be surprised if some of those are converted to -1000s or LRs. If they do place a new order it would probably be quite small. In the past they only had 5 A345s which were used to serve LAX and EWR although I don't think those flights were daily. |
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Jul 15, 2015 8:28:36 GMT 1
Well they still have 30 A350 options left.
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,959 
|
Post by s543 on Jul 15, 2015 8:43:21 GMT 1
I am sure this is minor quantity - really few operators who need such an extreme range and again it is going to be extremely un-efficient concerning cost.....
How ever the changes would be minor and simple so not a big deal for AB to make.
On the other hand the stretch might be more interesting for the airlines - but again how many could be sold ?
Those "extreme" stretches were in the history proven not too successful:
757-300
767-400
340-500
340-600
|
|
Baroque
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,991
|
Post by Baroque on Jul 15, 2015 19:05:36 GMT 1
Considering how the 777-200LR has sold, I doubt the market would be that large although from Airbus's perspective, it should be pretty easy to do the LR with low costs of development. I wondered if some airlines like Delta who operate the 77L will be interested in the [speculative] high MTOW variant as their replacement. Airbus has previously said that the A359 has the freighter DNA built into it from the start. |
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Jul 16, 2015 15:38:16 GMT 1
I guess an LR version would work by having more First Class / business class / premium economy seats, so less passengers and baggage and less cargo to save weight, replaced by extra fuel tanks ? SQ does not want an all-premium aircraft. According to Leeham, a 12 tonnes MTOW increase is enough to do the trick, while preserving payload. It should not be expensive, since it appears to be mostly - not only - a paper change. Airbus actually needs to increase MTOW by 5 tonnes over what has already been certified. I think Airbus is trying to keep the 777X out of SQ's fleet. EDIT : I should have mentioned that the LR version requires a larger tank (the same Airbus has developped for the -1000) and improved brakes. The main cost should be certification. |
|
|
|
Post by stealthmanbob on Jul 16, 2015 15:47:37 GMT 1
I did not mean ALL premium. I meant on a very long flight you would normally expect more passengers (and their employers Flying T&Cs) to choose First / Business / Prem Economy Over economy etc. meaning a diff config of seating, the over all effect being say 40 less passengers and their bags (saving weight).
|
|
kronus
in service - 1 year
Posts: 3,412
|
Post by kronus on Sept 10, 2015 9:04:34 GMT 1
|
|
