Originally Posted by
tdracer
A more factual interpretation would be:
After the financial bath we've taken over the last four years (due to the MAX and COVID), we can't afford to launch a new airplane program for the next five or ten years.
So we're desperately hoping that the technological progress over the next decade makes that a financially wise move..
Originally Posted by
WHBM
And of course this becomes self-fulfilling. Airbus don't do a clean sheet A320 replacement. Why should they, it would cost a packet, and they would just be competing with their own current product. Boeing will bounce along as a No 2 competitor, Russian and Chinese attempts are amateurish. I suspect the next advances will come not from the airframers, but from the engine manufacturers.
.
On the other hand, Airbus has buildings full of design engineers and an industrial relations environment where they're difficult to lay off, so maybe they'll keep them gainfully employed. AB can now be confident that BA won't be launching any major threats to their product lines for a decade or so, which means they can afford to design & launch derivatives that will have a long-enough market life to earn their capital back. If they do it right, or even only fairly right, they can also make life even more difficult for Boeing and China to get into the market.
This could lead to:
- the A220-500;
- an A325 - an A320 with a small stretch;
- an A326 & A327 - a re-winged A321 & A321XLR; and
- an A350neo, including a -1200/-2000 model if the 777-9 looks like it might make any market impact