sean
in Convoy en route to Toulouse
Posts: 96
|
Post by sean on Dec 20, 2017 18:43:36 GMT 1
Sean, you may be right, but we cannot be quite sure of what actually derailed the deal. As what happened was a last minute collapse, it may be a matter of wording. I don't want to speculate too much, I hope they bypass the roadblock, whatever it is. Agreed,... My analysis, which I pieced together from the various news sources out there, is quite simplified and definitely just the tip of the iceberg. However, for something so dramatic to have happened at the airshow (and don't underestimate how dramatic it actually was taking into account the organizations, individuals, and amount of work put into it), there is definitely continuous negotiations going on and I'm quite confident something will "shake out" quite soon.
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957
Member is Online
|
Post by s543 on Dec 20, 2017 23:26:16 GMT 1
And is it realistic - that even for the neo - 80 other i.e. not EK orders will appear. As the situation looks like it is very doubtful.
It seems that there are slots for the 350, 787, 330, 777 and frankly if the overall cost for seat/ton is comparable the airlines with those smaller frames do offer better (if maybe less comfortable) service since instead of once they fly twice or instead of twice they fly three times.... or they open routes to smaller airports i.e. do allow one less plane change, so....... and they have much better flexibility without the stress to have 500+ people daily......
We all do know that to change a plane in FRA, CDG, LHR, ATL, JFK.... is not a big joy - so as always we will see.
Up to that I really do believe that EK pissed of AB by the big order of 787-10 - once more I am sure that the A380 is for AB question of prestige only - much much less important today than 10 years back. AB does not have any profit it has loss on A380 - immaterial if the production is 0.5 or 1.5 frames / month.
I am much more pessimistic concerning the future of the A380 then you sean/philidor
And the A380 is realistically around 20 years old design - heavy by today standards and to make a serious modernization i.e. a proper neo would cost a fortune, a lot of changes are needed - was discussed here many times.
This money/resources can be spend much more reasonable and I do believe there is many projects which would generate in the end profit and no loss.
Another problem is huge/heavy customization, which makes the second hand use very problematic as is seen now.
|
|
sean
in Convoy en route to Toulouse
Posts: 96
|
Post by sean on Dec 21, 2017 18:12:48 GMT 1
Again, this is part of the whole negotiation process between AB, RR, and EK regarding the future of the program. I guess the Trent XWB is back on the discussion table if the program will continue for a least the next 10 years as EK is demanding. Interesting related article that I just found: www.myrepublica.com/news/31845/
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957
Member is Online
|
Post by s543 on Dec 22, 2017 12:43:00 GMT 1
Interesting point is that he thinks that EK ordered those 787-10 to "kick in the butt" AB since they are not working on the A380 neo But he might be right. Who knows. It is turn around reasoning to my one, but ?
|
|
philidor
in service - 6 years
Posts: 8,950
|
Post by philidor on Dec 22, 2017 17:00:57 GMT 1
Again, this is part of the whole negotiation process between AB, RR, and EK regarding the future of the program. I guess the Trent XWB is back on the discussion table if the program will continue for a least the next 10 years as EK is demanding. I don't believe that the TXWB can be a serious candidate (it has too much thrust and it is too heavy). Whatever talks may be going on about an A380neo would center on an engine of a future generation, making the timeline a key point.
|
|
sean
in Convoy en route to Toulouse
Posts: 96
|
Post by sean on Dec 24, 2017 20:10:36 GMT 1
Again, this is part of the whole negotiation process between AB, RR, and EK regarding the future of the program. I guess the Trent XWB is back on the discussion table if the program will continue for a least the next 10 years as EK is demanding. I don't believe that the TXWB can be a serious candidate (it has too much thrust and it is too heavy). Whatever talks may be going on about an A380neo would center on an engine of a future generation, making the timeline a key point. Agreed that the engine choice is key. A brand new engine, however, is a risk I don't believe RR would take. It would have to be a derivative, maybe the Trent 1000 TEN. Even with it's 10cm more narrow fan diameter. The thrust and weight would suffice.
|
|
s543
in service - 2 years
Posts: 3,957
Member is Online
|
Post by s543 on Dec 24, 2017 22:04:39 GMT 1
I do not believe that the Trent 1000 is upgrade worth much hassle - it has not enough trust, and is basically the same as the newest 900s. Weights about the same (maybe 200-300 kg less). The XWB has not the much more pressure - is about 600 kg heavier (only) and has only 2" bigger diameter and is a generation newer i.e. I would not write it down.
Also the 900s used by EK are 80200lbf. The "stock" XWB84 from A359 is 84200lbf i.e. not such a big difference.
But anyway I do agree that the discussion goes for next generation engine.....
|
|
kronus
in service - 1 year
Posts: 3,209
Member is Online
|
Post by kronus on Dec 27, 2017 17:56:21 GMT 1
|
|
XWB
in service - 11 years
Posts: 16,115
|
Post by XWB on Dec 27, 2017 18:03:38 GMT 1
The XWB has not the much more pressure - is about 600 kg heavier (only) According to EASA type certificates: Trent 900: 6246 kg Trent XWB: 7233 kg That's more than "just" 600 kg heavier. Now multiply that by 4 (because 4 engines) and the weight goes up by a whopping 4t. And that figure doesn't even include wing reinforcements.
|
|
mjoelnir
in service - 2 years
Posts: 4,089
|
Post by mjoelnir on Dec 27, 2017 18:29:37 GMT 1
The XWB has not the much more pressure - is about 600 kg heavier (only) According to EASA type certificates: Trent 900: 6246 kg Trent XWB: 7233 kg That's more than "just" 600 kg heavier. Now multiply that by 4 (because 4 engines) and the weight goes up by a whopping 4t. And that figure doesn't even include wing reinforcements. Engine Alliance GP7200: 6718 Kg That would make the Trent XWB 515 KG heavier than the GP7200, that is just slightly more than 2t. But I would agree that the XWB will not find its way on the A380. My bet would be the Trent Advanced, if it would be done at all.
|
|