Good News - A350XWB fuselage could become CFRP barrel design

[vapilot2004]

From day one of the launch announcement for the A350XWB, I felt strongly that the latest iteration using CFRP panel on metal frame construction was a poor choice with regards to weight and maintenance considerations and manufacturing costs. Many of the advantages gained by using composites would have been zeroed out with the previously announced CFRP panel scheme.

It appears that Airbus may now see fit to follow Boeing's lead on the basic structure of the fuselage for the A350 giving the design a much better chance of being a true competitor.

Now, if they can find their way to narrow the target and leave the 777 out of the XWBs performance goals, making for a lighter more 787-like machine, I believe there will be another good aeroplane to add to the worldwide stables. :ok:


Fresh news from the inbox:

Airbus moving toward solid composite fuselage on A350 XWB
Friday January 26, 2007
Airbus appears to be moving toward adopting a solid composite barrel for its A350 XWB after receiving mixed feedback on its plan to use composite panels on an aluminum frame.
According to industry analysts, trade studies are underway in Toulouse for the change. Last fall ATWOnline revealed that Airbus was swapping to a composite structure (ATWOnline, Oct. 25, 2006) and that the aircraft's EIS would slip to 2014.
The latest mooted change would not surprise Emirates President Tim Clark, who told this website yesterday that he feels the future lies in a 787-style structure. "That is the way [the industry] is going to go," he said.
Clark said the A350 XWB remains a bit of a mystery, adding that he doesn't want to discuss the aircraft with Airbus until it freezes the design. The 2014 timeline is a concern, although he said he does not want the manufacturer to rush the design, and he wants to see two engine-makers commit to the program, which "presents a problem for GE for the A350-1000." He added, "That said, we will still look at the A350 and what guarantees on performance and delivery Airbus are offering."
Like others, Clark has reservations about Airbus's ability to tackle both the 787-8 and the 777-300ER with one aircraft family. "If they succeed, Eureka. If not, well, it's a gamble."
Emirates would like to be in detailed discussions on the A350-1000 and the 787-10 by mid-year for an order for 60-100 aircraft. The order will not be split. On the 787-10 Clark would like to see more range, which Boeing is working to deliver.

[Torquelink]

Maybe they realise that producing a "me too" aircraft with similar capacities to the 787, with no more advanced technology than the 787 but six years later wouldn't be a wise move - especially when they are already 450 orders behind. Whereas aiming it more at the 1990s technology 777 will give them a greater technological advantage and a better chance of getting volume sales?

[vapilot2004]

Interesting point TQL. The 777 is getting along in years now. Perhaps Airbus should in fact aim higher then and ignore the area where the smaller 787s reside.

My concern is that a compromise aircraft covering the spread from the smallest 787 to the T7 would be a poor competitor and I sincerely hope that Airbus comes to this realisation and narrows their focus - otherwise the WB market share may continue to remain limited for Airbus. *
*Caveat: A paid market analyst I am not. :)

The big question: Just where is the sweet spot of widebody success for the next few decades? 250+, 350+, 400+ seats (or possibly larger) ?

Whatever the eventual outcome, for CFRP fuselages, the barrel model surely must be the most prudent way forward.

[Torquelink]

Vapilot, I think you are right on the construction method - it didn't sem to make any kind of sense to move to carbon fibre and then use it in sheets over separate stringers just like alloy.

The Boeing Current Market Outlook 2006 forecasts 3,030 "small" twin aisle deliveries to 2025 and 2,770 "large" twin aisles in the same period. They categorise "small" as including 767,787 (excluding, I imagine, the -10) and A332. "Large" includes all 777s, A333 and A350. So the 787 is aimed at what Boeing consider to be the largest segment but the "large" segment isn't that much smaller so Airbus might have a sporting chance provided, as you say, the design isn't compromised by being spread across so many sizes. I note that they intend to produce the -900 first as that's where they see most interest which might be evidence that the -800 is relativeky heavier per seat etc and therefore less competitive with the 787. The problem I see is that although the A350 now has a wider cross section than the 787 it is still 10 ins narrower than the 777s. Also, I assume that there's nothing to stop Boeing hanging whatever engines power the A350-1000 on the 773ER which I imagine would erode the -1000s efficiency advantage considerably.

Still - that's why it's a sporty game!

[seacue]

The 777 is getting along in years now.

Like the 737, I suppose you mean. Only 619 sold in 2006.
Life begins at 40 :)
Amazing, isn't it.

[Whitehatter]

Depends on which way you approach the subject.

The Airbus guys were pushing their design of panels/frame as being the better system with regard to repairability. The 787 will be the largest composite structure flying when it gets into the air, and there are a lot of questions that can only be answered by testing and use in the field. For instance whether a heavy landing of the type which bends a loaded charter 767 can be repaired at a distant location, or whether the frame works as advertised and can't be damaged that way in the first place.

The Boeing guys are trying to deliver a frame which isn't supposed to bend that way, Airbus and its design people were thinking along the lines of one where a panel structure allows for some surgery to replace broken sections.

I'm aware of Boeing's work on ramp rash and minor scrapes, they seem to have the bases covered there with a better-than-new process of repairing minor to moderate damage. It is how the aircraft will perform in a serious prang that led to Airbus floating the panel structure.

Of course I could be reading this the wrong way and be talking total bolleaux as usual...:}

[Grunf]

Whitehatter,

you're right at the spot, no mistake :D

[barit1]

Will Airbus actually call it a A350XWB when it finally rolls out? :confused:

[Kerosene Kraut]

Today the A350 XWB-component production started with a carbon fibre center wing box at Nantes.

picture:
Airbus A350 XWB: Baubeginn in Nantes - FLUG REVUE (http://www.flugrevue.de/de/zivilluftfahrt/fluggeraete/airbus-a350-xwb-baubeginn-in-nantes.16026.htm)