Airbus: 7E7 is rushed and ridiculous
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Belgium
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus: 7E7 is rushed and ridiculous
From The Engineer, 11 June 2004
Rushed and ridiculous
By Richard Fisher
Airbus has attacked the high proportion of composites used in
Boeing's 7E7 Dreamliner, branding the aircraft's
development 'rushed' and 'ridiculous'.
The 7E7 will contain double the amount of composites used in the
Airbus A380 - including most of the fuselage and wings. But Airbus
claims Boeing has rushed through the technology before it is
sufficiently matured.
Colin Stuart, Airbus vice-president of marketing, said composites
should be introduced with caution in aircraft design. 'If you start
to look at the various loads on composites [in an all-composite
fuselage], it is absolutely the wrong thing to do.'
Current composite material is unsuitable for many areas of the
fuselage claimed Alain Garcia, executive vice-president of
engineering. 'It's perfect for tension and fatigue, but poor for
compression.'
Airbus has stepped up the war of words with Boeing after the US
company criticised weight increases in the A380. Airbus claims the
7E7 will be heavier than Boeing has admitted. 'The 7E7 carries the
weight penalty of a compromised and rushed design,' the company said.
Dr Jürgen Klenner, Airbus senior vice-president of structure
engineering, said today's carbon fibre is often no more than 'black
aluminium' - with the same attributes as traditional materials
-
offering few benefits for the extra cost. Carbon fibre does have
weight advantages, but according to Klenner the cost of the raw
material is up to 500 per cent higher. 'We do not apply a material
because it is trendy, we do it when we are convinced it is mature
enough. There are crucial questions that have not yet been
answered,' he said.
There are concerns that composites present a higher fire risk,
delaminate in humid conditions, and are more expensive to repair.
Prof Phil Irving, civil aviation authority expert in damage
tolerance at Cranfield University, said engineers should dripfeed
composites into aircraft design to avoid 'unexpected
failures. 'There is always a risk when introducing something new on
to an aircraft, no matter how many tests. There's always something
we haven't realised.'
Bird strike, stones or taxiing accidents would greatly reduce the
compressive strength of composites such as carbon fibre. 'You can
avoid the problem by making it thicker, but that has economic
implications. It's rather difficult to see how you can have a whole
fuselage made of composites.'
Airbus chief executive Noel Forgeard claimed the 7E7 would have
identical technology to the A380. 'This is why Boeing has strongly
discounted it to sell it,' he said. Airbus accused Boeing of
tinkering with the 7E7's supposedly advanced technology during its
development, saying the final product will be more conventional and
heavier than originally claimed.
Stuart said: 'They have rushed this aircraft through in a ridiculous
way.'But Boeing denies this, pointing out that the aircraft was
developed in parallel to, rather than after, the company's now-
cancelled project, the Sonic Cruiser.
A Boeing spokesman said: 'We've put a great amount of work into
composites, drawing on the work we've already done on the 777 and a
whole variety of military aircraft. The 7E7 is a bold move, but if
you look at the efficiency and environmental advantages it's a move
in the right direction.'
The 7E7 will contain 50 per cent of its weight in composites, making
it lighter and more fuel-efficient, Boeing claims. The A380
structure contains under 25 per cent composites, while Airbus chose
not to use the carbon fibre wing planned for its future military
aircraft.
Boeing announced this week it expects up to 200 orders for the 7E7
in 2004. Only Japan's All Nippon Airways and Air New Zealand have
placed orders, compared with 129 orders to date for the A380.
Airbus's approach for the A380 is in sharp contrast to Boeing's
claims for the smaller Dreamliner. Airbus is focused on shipping up
to 550 people between megahub airports, while Boeing believes flying
faster and lighter point-to-point is the future of air travel.
Rushed and ridiculous
By Richard Fisher
Airbus has attacked the high proportion of composites used in
Boeing's 7E7 Dreamliner, branding the aircraft's
development 'rushed' and 'ridiculous'.
The 7E7 will contain double the amount of composites used in the
Airbus A380 - including most of the fuselage and wings. But Airbus
claims Boeing has rushed through the technology before it is
sufficiently matured.
Colin Stuart, Airbus vice-president of marketing, said composites
should be introduced with caution in aircraft design. 'If you start
to look at the various loads on composites [in an all-composite
fuselage], it is absolutely the wrong thing to do.'
Current composite material is unsuitable for many areas of the
fuselage claimed Alain Garcia, executive vice-president of
engineering. 'It's perfect for tension and fatigue, but poor for
compression.'
Airbus has stepped up the war of words with Boeing after the US
company criticised weight increases in the A380. Airbus claims the
7E7 will be heavier than Boeing has admitted. 'The 7E7 carries the
weight penalty of a compromised and rushed design,' the company said.
Dr Jürgen Klenner, Airbus senior vice-president of structure
engineering, said today's carbon fibre is often no more than 'black
aluminium' - with the same attributes as traditional materials
-
offering few benefits for the extra cost. Carbon fibre does have
weight advantages, but according to Klenner the cost of the raw
material is up to 500 per cent higher. 'We do not apply a material
because it is trendy, we do it when we are convinced it is mature
enough. There are crucial questions that have not yet been
answered,' he said.
There are concerns that composites present a higher fire risk,
delaminate in humid conditions, and are more expensive to repair.
Prof Phil Irving, civil aviation authority expert in damage
tolerance at Cranfield University, said engineers should dripfeed
composites into aircraft design to avoid 'unexpected
failures. 'There is always a risk when introducing something new on
to an aircraft, no matter how many tests. There's always something
we haven't realised.'
Bird strike, stones or taxiing accidents would greatly reduce the
compressive strength of composites such as carbon fibre. 'You can
avoid the problem by making it thicker, but that has economic
implications. It's rather difficult to see how you can have a whole
fuselage made of composites.'
Airbus chief executive Noel Forgeard claimed the 7E7 would have
identical technology to the A380. 'This is why Boeing has strongly
discounted it to sell it,' he said. Airbus accused Boeing of
tinkering with the 7E7's supposedly advanced technology during its
development, saying the final product will be more conventional and
heavier than originally claimed.
Stuart said: 'They have rushed this aircraft through in a ridiculous
way.'But Boeing denies this, pointing out that the aircraft was
developed in parallel to, rather than after, the company's now-
cancelled project, the Sonic Cruiser.
A Boeing spokesman said: 'We've put a great amount of work into
composites, drawing on the work we've already done on the 777 and a
whole variety of military aircraft. The 7E7 is a bold move, but if
you look at the efficiency and environmental advantages it's a move
in the right direction.'
The 7E7 will contain 50 per cent of its weight in composites, making
it lighter and more fuel-efficient, Boeing claims. The A380
structure contains under 25 per cent composites, while Airbus chose
not to use the carbon fibre wing planned for its future military
aircraft.
Boeing announced this week it expects up to 200 orders for the 7E7
in 2004. Only Japan's All Nippon Airways and Air New Zealand have
placed orders, compared with 129 orders to date for the A380.
Airbus's approach for the A380 is in sharp contrast to Boeing's
claims for the smaller Dreamliner. Airbus is focused on shipping up
to 550 people between megahub airports, while Boeing believes flying
faster and lighter point-to-point is the future of air travel.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,898
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
>>...Colin Stuart, Airbus vice-president of marketing, said composites should be introduced with caution in aircraft design.<<
Airbus sure speaks from tragic experience on this one...
Airbus sure speaks from tragic experience on this one...
The Aquatone Article
Join Date: May 2004
Location: London
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airbus: Market segmentation is in the eye of the beholder
Dateline: Wednesday June 09, 2004
The theory that future international traffic development increasingly will be given over to nonhub, point-to-point flying dominated by aircraft such as Boeing's newly launched 217/289-seat 7E7 is not supported by recent history, and particularly not by trends in Asia, where ultra-large aircraft like the 550-seat A380 will be in heavy demand for many years to come, according to Airbus VP-Market Forecasts and Research Laurent Rouaud.
Speaking last week at the Airbus Technical Press Briefing in Toulouse, Rouaud claimed that in the years 1998-2003, only one new route was launched between Tokyo Narita and a secondary city in the US or Canada (Houston) while four were suspended (Narita to Calgary, Portland, Las Vegas and Toronto).
Furthermore, 50% of US-Narita passengers stay in Tokyo while 60% of US-Seoul passengers likewise remain in the South Korean capital, according to Rouaud, who cited data from BACK Aviation. Taking a position often made by US hub-and-spoke carriers, he argued that even relatively large cities cannot support nonstop point-to-point service. Dallas and Guangzhou, two cities of approximately 4 million people each, do not generate enough O&D traffic for one flight per week, he claimed, again citing BACK Aviation data.
And although passengers may prefer nonstops to connections, they vote with their pocketbooks. US Commerce Dept. surveys and CIC Research show that among economy-class passengers, ticket price is twice as important as the availability of a nonstop flight in airline selection criteria, while among business- and first-class passengers frequent-flier programs and price are each twice as important as the availability of a nonstop.
Asia is also different from Europe and the US in that the region's urban population is highly concentrated in 11 primary cities. According to Rouaud, 80% of Europe-Asia flights are operated on primary routes. Even on the transatlantic, "core routes continue to grow." Citing data from OAG, he said the top 20 transatlantic routes' seat capacity market share was 40% in 2003 while the remaining 60% was spread over 216 other routes--both figures unchanged from 1990.--Perry Flint
Dateline: Wednesday June 09, 2004
The theory that future international traffic development increasingly will be given over to nonhub, point-to-point flying dominated by aircraft such as Boeing's newly launched 217/289-seat 7E7 is not supported by recent history, and particularly not by trends in Asia, where ultra-large aircraft like the 550-seat A380 will be in heavy demand for many years to come, according to Airbus VP-Market Forecasts and Research Laurent Rouaud.
Speaking last week at the Airbus Technical Press Briefing in Toulouse, Rouaud claimed that in the years 1998-2003, only one new route was launched between Tokyo Narita and a secondary city in the US or Canada (Houston) while four were suspended (Narita to Calgary, Portland, Las Vegas and Toronto).
Furthermore, 50% of US-Narita passengers stay in Tokyo while 60% of US-Seoul passengers likewise remain in the South Korean capital, according to Rouaud, who cited data from BACK Aviation. Taking a position often made by US hub-and-spoke carriers, he argued that even relatively large cities cannot support nonstop point-to-point service. Dallas and Guangzhou, two cities of approximately 4 million people each, do not generate enough O&D traffic for one flight per week, he claimed, again citing BACK Aviation data.
And although passengers may prefer nonstops to connections, they vote with their pocketbooks. US Commerce Dept. surveys and CIC Research show that among economy-class passengers, ticket price is twice as important as the availability of a nonstop flight in airline selection criteria, while among business- and first-class passengers frequent-flier programs and price are each twice as important as the availability of a nonstop.
Asia is also different from Europe and the US in that the region's urban population is highly concentrated in 11 primary cities. According to Rouaud, 80% of Europe-Asia flights are operated on primary routes. Even on the transatlantic, "core routes continue to grow." Citing data from OAG, he said the top 20 transatlantic routes' seat capacity market share was 40% in 2003 while the remaining 60% was spread over 216 other routes--both figures unchanged from 1990.--Perry Flint
Iconoclast
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The home of Dudley Dooright-Where the lead dog is the only one that gets a change of scenery.
Posts: 2,132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Availability is the operative word.
I worked on the V-22 specializing on structural repairs mainly on the composite structure. The US Navy specified the primary means of repairing the composite structure. After introducing structural damage on the composite skin and repairing it according to the Navy instructions we tried to verify the efficacy of the repair by X-ray NDT. The repair material specified by the Navy was opaque to X-rays and there was no way to verify the repair.
The V-22 is as big a B-17 +/- a couple of inches and the rear of the fuselage that would run from the rear of the wing on the B-17 to the tail (representing ½ of the entire structure) is in fact one piece. If this section of the fuselage suffered combat damage or ground handling damage the entire structure had to be returned to Boeing for repair in the autoclave that was used to build it.
If the 7E7 suffered handling damage there may not be any one in the area that could repair it assuming it could be repaired and the repair verified. If the damage were substantial the aircraft would be grounded until it could be repaired. In flight the composite structure would perform flawlessly assuming adequate testing but it would be on the ground where the problems would arise.
The V-22 is as big a B-17 +/- a couple of inches and the rear of the fuselage that would run from the rear of the wing on the B-17 to the tail (representing ½ of the entire structure) is in fact one piece. If this section of the fuselage suffered combat damage or ground handling damage the entire structure had to be returned to Boeing for repair in the autoclave that was used to build it.
If the 7E7 suffered handling damage there may not be any one in the area that could repair it assuming it could be repaired and the repair verified. If the damage were substantial the aircraft would be grounded until it could be repaired. In flight the composite structure would perform flawlessly assuming adequate testing but it would be on the ground where the problems would arise.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: On the ground for now.
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Raytheon Premier (Exec. Jet) has proven it's fuselage to be very successful. A tape laying machine lays the fibre on to a large mandrel shaped like the fuselage. What a great way to build a modern fuselage with someone sitting monitoring a machine. No more labor intensive assembly with aluminum skins held together with thousands of rivets. Stressed skin fuselages have been around for a long time but it's is great to move on and develop a new way to manufacture fuselages.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Belgium
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think many of you miss the point.
Airbus is feeling the heat, there less interest in the A380 than expected and much more for the 7E7 than Airbus thought.
Additionally, Airbus is faced with many unexpected weight problems with the A380, as they did and still do with the A340-500 and A340-600, despite being derivatives of existing airplanes. The A345 and A346 are clearly under delivering in terms of fuel burn and reliability while the 777-300ER, as every Boeing since the 747, is delivering more than promised with better fuel burn and lower weight and better reliability than targeted.
Airbus inability to fix the A346 and A345 is starting to upset the airlines that are losing faith in Airbus’s ability to deliver what they promised with the A380
Airbus has now to resort to heavy discounting to sell the A346 and A345 and they’re noticing they still can’t get an airline to commit to the A380 without heavy discounting.
The Chinese, while readying a mega order for the 7E7, are unfortunately moderately interested in a small A380 order, claiming that the A380 is not the kind of airplane best suited to the future of aviation in China.
It is clear that the 7E7 will slowly kill the A330, which is Airbus cash cow and best airplane.
The 7E7 will also make the conventional A380 look like an old generation airplane, which for the flagship of a company claiming to set the standards is a bit humiliating.
Airbus is stuck with the costly development of the A380, the A400M with an all composite wing, and is beginning to show signs of panic in face of the huge interest generated by the 7E7 which is clearly about to set the standards hence the silly comments “rushed” and “ridiculous”.
Airbus is feeling the heat, there less interest in the A380 than expected and much more for the 7E7 than Airbus thought.
Additionally, Airbus is faced with many unexpected weight problems with the A380, as they did and still do with the A340-500 and A340-600, despite being derivatives of existing airplanes. The A345 and A346 are clearly under delivering in terms of fuel burn and reliability while the 777-300ER, as every Boeing since the 747, is delivering more than promised with better fuel burn and lower weight and better reliability than targeted.
Airbus inability to fix the A346 and A345 is starting to upset the airlines that are losing faith in Airbus’s ability to deliver what they promised with the A380
Airbus has now to resort to heavy discounting to sell the A346 and A345 and they’re noticing they still can’t get an airline to commit to the A380 without heavy discounting.
The Chinese, while readying a mega order for the 7E7, are unfortunately moderately interested in a small A380 order, claiming that the A380 is not the kind of airplane best suited to the future of aviation in China.
It is clear that the 7E7 will slowly kill the A330, which is Airbus cash cow and best airplane.
The 7E7 will also make the conventional A380 look like an old generation airplane, which for the flagship of a company claiming to set the standards is a bit humiliating.
Airbus is stuck with the costly development of the A380, the A400M with an all composite wing, and is beginning to show signs of panic in face of the huge interest generated by the 7E7 which is clearly about to set the standards hence the silly comments “rushed” and “ridiculous”.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Recently in Aircraft Commerce (April/May 2004) there was a 5-page analysis of ultra-longhaul routes and 345/7E7. Interesting reading. Basic summary was the idea of "long-thin routes" has failed at SQ and EK with A345. It works, but there is no commercial success becuase there is a lack of point-to-point passengers. A345 became a prestigious and expensive toy, but not a yield improving tool. Furthermore there is literally just a few other routes where anyone can deploy A345 without facing constant losses and no perspectives.
Article also basically says it is likely 7E7 would be just a replacement for 767s on existing routes, not a new routes explorer.
Article also basically says it is likely 7E7 would be just a replacement for 767s on existing routes, not a new routes explorer.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Around
Age: 56
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A v B
Blah de blah de blah de blah de blah. Please, gentlemen, there is no reason for us to start an A v B thread; the companies involved are fully capable of their own mudsliging. Pathetic.
Rebel PPRuNer
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Toronto, Canada (formerly EICK)
Age: 51
Posts: 2,834
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be nice if Airbus could produce an A310 replacement sometime soon, CCQ with 33x/34x - better that than hoping to cram more people into 321s or keeping the 310 line open and hoping 7e7 doesn't fly.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dallas, TX USA
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know if the 7E7 will actually replace the A330, since the 2 aircraft are not quite in the same size class (the A330 being larger). It's possilbe that the 7E7 will make the long thin market profitable, since it's a significantly smaller aircraft than the 345, as the 345 may be too large an airplane to explore these routes.
Just to comment on the composite fuselage, the Beech Starship is another good example of how well this can work. While the Starship was not a commercial success, to my knowledge Raytheon keeps all 50 of the original Starships flying. When an owner wants to sell a Starship, Raytheon buys it back, then does any maintenance work needed on the aircraft, then sells it to the next buyer. I understand they do this to demonstrate that a composite aircraft can have a long life, since Raytheon is heavely invested in composite airplanes.
Just to comment on the composite fuselage, the Beech Starship is another good example of how well this can work. While the Starship was not a commercial success, to my knowledge Raytheon keeps all 50 of the original Starships flying. When an owner wants to sell a Starship, Raytheon buys it back, then does any maintenance work needed on the aircraft, then sells it to the next buyer. I understand they do this to demonstrate that a composite aircraft can have a long life, since Raytheon is heavely invested in composite airplanes.
Last edited by Flight Safety; 15th Jun 2004 at 16:07.
PPRuNe Supporter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Devon, UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Safety,
I think you will find that Raytheon are buying back StarShips in order to scrap them, they no longer wish to support them partly because of the expense of repairing the fuselage.
I think you will find that Raytheon are buying back StarShips in order to scrap them, they no longer wish to support them partly because of the expense of repairing the fuselage.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Wet Coast
Posts: 2,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,670
Received 327 Likes
on
180 Posts
Flight Safety, about to reply exactly the same as TallBloke... that's what I read in various mags recently. All are being scrapped, save a couple that are going into museums. Shame, lovely looking aircraft...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: the edge of madness
Posts: 493
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Aircraft Commerce article referred to by CargoOne also said that, while SQ and EK assumed that they'd be able to charge a premium for A345 non-stop service, they haven't managed to make it stick and now charge the same business class fare as the one-stop services. Thus the high seat-mile cost aircraft isn't pulling in a premium to pay for it. Article also said that long-haul hub bypass wouldn't work as at least one end of the route would need to be a large hub in order to generate sufficient high yield pax. All these comments would seem to apply to the 7E7 (long range variants) and the B777-200LR too.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Dallas, TX USA
Posts: 739
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Darn, sorry to hear that about the Starships. 
I guess I hadn't kept up to date on their fate lately.
I had the privilege the other day to see one of the 3 original prototype Lear Fan 2100s. Not much to look at on the inside (since it was a prototype), but it was beautiful on the outside. It seems that remaining Lear Fan airframes are used rather extensively for composite airframe damage and impact testing, judging from a quick search of the Internet.
I guess I hadn't kept up to date on their fate lately.I had the privilege the other day to see one of the 3 original prototype Lear Fan 2100s. Not much to look at on the inside (since it was a prototype), but it was beautiful on the outside. It seems that remaining Lear Fan airframes are used rather extensively for composite airframe damage and impact testing, judging from a quick search of the Internet.
Union Goon
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: New Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,097
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, that has to be more of a problem with the seatmile costs of the A340-500 which hasn't turned out to be great.
Remember when you bypass a hub you reduce the miles of the trip plus the cycle on the aircraft so if the costs are anywhere near the same it is cheaper to bypass the hub.
If the A340-500's costs are that high it speaks VERY badly about the aircraft
Don't believe me Draw and 3 points on earth. Unless they are perfectly aligned youare a forming a triangle.
It may not have worked for singapore, but it might work much BETTER for singapore's competitors who would be bypassing singapore. In the case of singapore, they would be effectively competing with themselves.
Cheers
Wino
Remember when you bypass a hub you reduce the miles of the trip plus the cycle on the aircraft so if the costs are anywhere near the same it is cheaper to bypass the hub.
If the A340-500's costs are that high it speaks VERY badly about the aircraft
Don't believe me Draw and 3 points on earth. Unless they are perfectly aligned youare a forming a triangle.
It may not have worked for singapore, but it might work much BETTER for singapore's competitors who would be bypassing singapore. In the case of singapore, they would be effectively competing with themselves.
Cheers
Wino