philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Nov 16, 2017 10:38:29 GMT 1
It seem like it’s not solely the range & capacity combination of A350-900 that make Emirates to choose 787-10. They are not happy with the rear pressure bulkhead position. EK never had any concern with the rear pressure bulkhead position. Airbus however, trying to match the 787-10 seat number, made a last minute offer to move the rear pressure bulkhead back, allowing an additional seat row. Clark said the offer came too late ...
|
|
|
Post by Jkkw on Nov 16, 2017 13:27:22 GMT 1
|
|
cck
Final Assembly Line stage 1
Posts: 228
|
Post by cck on Nov 16, 2017 13:43:56 GMT 1
EK never had any concern with the rear pressure bulkhead position. Airbus however, trying to match the 787-10 seat number, made a last minute offer to move the rear pressure bulkhead back, allowing an additional seat row. Clark said the offer came too late ... That make sense. A seat row increases is just marginal, the difference between A350-900 & 787-10 that close?
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Nov 16, 2017 15:27:54 GMT 1
That make sense. A seat row increases is just marginal, the difference between A350-900 & 787-10 that close? No, one more row would not quite close the seat gap, which is a bit larger, but it might still be enough to turn the tables ...
|
|
|
Post by kevin5345179 on Nov 17, 2017 17:23:41 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by peter on Nov 17, 2017 19:55:25 GMT 1
It's not a firm order (as in article), it's an LOI (for 12 + 12 options).
|
|
|
Post by kevin5345179 on Nov 17, 2017 20:36:04 GMT 1
It's not a firm order (as in article), it's an LOI (for 12 + 12 options). Oops wasn't paying attention .... Probably should drink coffee before posting
|
|