Originally Posted by Keg
The A350 doesn't seem to fit the metrics that Qantas is after. The 777X (particularly the 8X) does though.
The payload range numbers you were working on are out by a along way, and today Boeing have actually admitted as much in public. Its been covered in Flight International.
Boeing revises "obsolete" performance assumptions - 8/3/2015 - Flight Global
Essentially it has always been smoke and mirrors, you get the fan boys who quote the most optimistic range on Wiki. People in industry working with the long range aircraft knew you could never actually buy an aircraft at the assumed empty weight in your airline configuration, load that many people on the aircraft and fly them the distances claimed. They also know what the general trend is for performance decrease with age, and are more likely to plan a purchase on degraded performance numbers.
This is what Boeing is saying now
787-8, 242 pax 7,355nm
787-9 , 280 pax 7,635nm
787-10 323 pax 6,430nm
777-8X 350 pax 8,700nm
777-300ER 386 pax 7,370nm
777-9X 406 pax 7,600nm
747-8 467 pax 7,730nm
When they are quoting those numbers, the payload the aircraft is carrying is normally only the number of pax by 210lb, SFA allowance for catering, bare minimum crew, no IFE, no magazines, no duty free, no cans/pallets for luggage, no cargo. In terms of flight planning, they assume the best profiles, 200 nm alternate, and FAA reserves.
The seat pitch Boeing works on is 60" for F, 38" for J, and 32" for Y. For long haul QF uses something like 79" for F, 78" for J, 38-42" for W, and 31-32" for Y. The real airline seats are also significantly heavier, sometimes 100+kg per seat in the premium cabins. Bottom line is that QF will never get that many pax on a long haul flight, and if they want to carry cargo, baggage, and catering, will need to drop that max range back even further.
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
The 350 is the right aeroplane for Jetstar. The 787/777. Is the right aeroplane for qantas.
If you look at what other airlines are doing, eg SQ, the 787 is going the LCC, and the A350 full service.
Does anyone know the true cruising speed of the A350 (not the manufacturer's stated figure)? With QF planning a lot of ULR flights, the cruise speed becomes critical because of crew duty limitations.
Yes it is known, and it is not constant in any airline environment. No airline I know of these days flies around constant Mach, its all econ speed. The cost index in the econ speed takes into account the crew costs. A 787/A350 in one airline will run around at different speeds to another, it all depends on what the accountants desire, not the pilots. The A350 will happily go between 0.76 and 0.96 and burn about the same fuel as an A330.
Originally Posted by Troo believer
You forgot that the Boeing CCQ includes the NG/787/777.
CCQ and MFF are Airbus terms, they not available on Boeing types. You are talking about recognized prior learning, which is not the same. In the US, the 787 and 777 are still different type ratings, not so in Australia.