PDA

View Full Version : Intrinsic cost of planes


chornedsnorkack
28th Mar 2007, 16:50
How much do planes cost to build?

A rough order of magnitude seems to be around $1 million per ton. A380 weighs about 270 tons and costs about $300 millions. Boeing 747 and 777 are over $200 millions. Boeing 737 and Airbus 320 are over $50 millions.

In the small end, Eclipse 500 weighs 1600 kg and costs $1,5 millions.

Now, compare with cars!

A newly built SUV or van weighing 1600 kg seems to cost 2 orders of magnitude less than a jet plane of comparable weight.

What is the principal difference in materials, that causes planes to be so much harder to build than cars?

Cpt_Pugwash
29th Mar 2007, 13:44
It's not just the cost of materials. As an example, there is a huge difference in development costs between certifying a road vehicle and an aerospace vehicle.
Enough already, this is getting too close to the day job. :)

PW

Whitehatter
29th Mar 2007, 16:41
There is also the small matter of engines. Road vehicle engines are not built to the same exacting tolerances and specifications, together with more exotic materials such as the hideously expensive titanium alloys and engine casings to retain the flying bits if it does go wrong.

You are buying safety and reliability in the end. The average SUV won't do hundreds of thousands of miles (if not millions) between major services.

jeppsbore
29th Mar 2007, 20:34
Whitehatter

That may well be the case for turbines but when was the last time you looked at an aviation piston engine?
To say road vehicle engines are not built to the same exacting tolerances and specifications is completely back to front. Road vehicle engines are far superior to absolutely anything available in the aviation market.
The majority of piston engines available today (lycoming and Tcm) were designed in the 1930's and 1940's and have not really progressed very far from their original design, particulary regarding metalurgy, fuel systems and ignition systems.

So in response to the original question, the reason aircraft / components cost so much is the red tape / certification / testing that they have to go through before being allowed to commit aviation.

Hope this helps

JB

BackPacker
29th Mar 2007, 22:16
Development cost of a new vehicle can be spread out over millions of cars vs. only a few hundred planes, if you're lucky. It will take Airbus something like 250 planes sold to recoup the development cost of the 380. Do you think that Volkswagen would even contemplate a new car model if they were only to sell 250 of them?

Plus competition is more fierce in the automotive industry vs. aviation.

barry lloyd
31st Mar 2007, 14:59
Be it a Pilatus PC-12 or a 747, all aircraft are, in effect, hand built. Leaving aside development costs, the non-recurring costs are very high. Every operator wants a diffierent specification, for which new design drawings have to made, approved by the certificating authority, etc. etc.
In my days of selling aircraft, (about 20 yrs ago,) the base price was roughly calculated on the basis of $165,000 per seat for aircraft up to about 100 seats. All aircraft are sold in dollars, no matter where they are built. Add on the cost of BFE ( galley, seats, carpets, curtains etc.,) a fancy paint scheme, and it isn't difficult to see why they're so expensive. And if you want reallyexpensive (and heavy!) throw in a freight door.
I'm sure they're more expensive these days, but then so is an Aston Martin, and that's hand-built too!
Backpacker:
I can assure you that competition amongst aircraft builders is more intense than anyone imagines, even before you throw in the national politics! Try getting hold of a copy of 'The Sporty Game' by John Newhouse. This is an excellent (and true) look behind the scenes in the plane-making world.

chornedsnorkack
2nd Apr 2007, 16:41
No doubt manufacturing a diamond ring involves moving and shifting through immense amounts of earth.

smith
2nd Apr 2007, 22:34
There are loads of things you guys have missed out like flight computers, navigation computers, external control surfaces, pressurisation, retractable wheels etc etc, none of these are needed in a car. Not only this but most systems on an aircraft are repeated 2 to 3 times in case one of the systems malfunctions, this is called redundancy.

I think the technology needed in order for an aircraft to fly is slightly higher than that required to stay on the road, the hardware and associated development costs for this would be far more expensive thanthat for a car.

chornedsnorkack
4th Apr 2007, 16:39
I reckon bauxite mining for aluminium, that stuff they make aeroplanes from, probably requires summat similar.

So does mining iron. Though iron is easier to produce than aluminum.

Does the price difference between cars and planes then come down to price difference between iron and aluminum?

About how much are planes worth as aluminum scrap metal?

StainesFS
4th Apr 2007, 17:12
Just googled. One UK scrap metal dealer offers £790 per tonne for scrap aluminium drinks cans.

John Farley
6th Apr 2007, 16:09
Its the variable height bit that costs the money

chornedsnorkack
9th Apr 2007, 15:06
the only road vehicles that do compare are at the very highest level of motor sport

Why?

Sport cars go to garage after every race.