Thursday, December 29, 2005
Thursday, December 22, 2005
Airliners.net Civil Aviation: A350 - 49 Orders Or 164 Orders?
Airliners.net Civil Aviation: A350 - 49 Orders Or 164 Orders?: "Boeing also counted commitments for their infamous '200' statement a year ago and not signed orders."
Saturday, December 17, 2005
Airliners.net Civil Aviation: Can Airbus Send The A350 Back To Redesign?
Airliners.net Civil Aviation: Can Airbus Send The A350 Back To Redesign?: "The 'authorisation to offer' the A350 for sale to the airlines came on December 10 2004.
Air Europa signed a MOU for 10 + 4 options on December 17, 2004.
US Air committed to 20 in May 2005 in exchange for a loan to help them emerge from bankruptcy.
The Kuwait-based ALAFCO announced its intent on 14 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show for 12 + 6 options.
CIT Group ordered 5; the order was announced on 18 August 2005.
GECAS ordered signed a letter of intent for a firm order of 10 A350s on 15 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show.
Kingfisher Airlines: A contract was signed on 15 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show for 10 A350s.
Qatar Airways on 13 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show, but at that time it was just an announcement that negotiations were under way for 60. Still Airbus counts this as an order.
TAM: 8 + 7 options: TAM signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) at Le Bourget on 16 June 2005.
There were also 10 unannounced prior to the 'official industrial launch' in October 2005. http://flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRA350.htm"
Air Europa signed a MOU for 10 + 4 options on December 17, 2004.
US Air committed to 20 in May 2005 in exchange for a loan to help them emerge from bankruptcy.
The Kuwait-based ALAFCO announced its intent on 14 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show for 12 + 6 options.
CIT Group ordered 5; the order was announced on 18 August 2005.
GECAS ordered signed a letter of intent for a firm order of 10 A350s on 15 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show.
Kingfisher Airlines: A contract was signed on 15 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show for 10 A350s.
Qatar Airways on 13 June 2005 at the Paris Air Show, but at that time it was just an announcement that negotiations were under way for 60. Still Airbus counts this as an order.
TAM: 8 + 7 options: TAM signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) at Le Bourget on 16 June 2005.
There were also 10 unannounced prior to the 'official industrial launch' in October 2005. http://flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/FRA350.htm"
Thursday, December 15, 2005
Airliners.net Civil Aviation: Is The A340 Cabin Sinking The A340 And A350!
Airliners.net Civil Aviation: Is The A340 Cabin Sinking The A340 And A350!: "As far as the ferighter cross section, the A300 cross section dos not allow for the loading flexibility and ULD contours that are needed in the general cargo market and with 45t maximum load, loading density is only practical for package freight operations, i.e. Fedex/UPS. For freighters above 70t the A300 cross section falls short of general cargo freighters already availible such as MD-11/DC-10 and most recently the 777F.
777F Cross-Section
A300F Cross-Section
Just for fun:
787F Cross section"
777F Cross-Section
A300F Cross-Section
Just for fun:
787F Cross section"
Tuesday, December 06, 2005
Air Canada concludes agreement for Boeing 777s and 787 Dreamliners
Air Canada concludes agreement for Boeing 777s and 787 Dreamliners: "The agreement also includes firm orders for 14 new Boeing 787 Dreamliners, plus options and purchase rights for an additional 46 aircraft. Air Canada's first 787 is scheduled for delivery in 2010."
Airliners.net Civil Aviation: A350 Cruise Speed Boosted To Mach 0.83
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/2472759/
- If plane X is just as efficient at .83 as plane B is at .81, plane X has the edge in relative fuel economy, since it flies the same distance in less time and burns relatively less fuel.
- Being able to go faster gives more flexibility to get and keep your optimum cruising level. If you're a 777 doing .84 and there's another 777 on your tail, no problem. If you're an A340 doing .82 being overtaken by a 777 doing .84, you may be required to descend, climb or some other maneuver to allow the faster plane to pass. The other way around: a faster plane can easily slow down, a slower plane has a harder time speeding up (less efficient). Especially over the ocean on perscribed tracks, you may be stuck at a lower level for hours and hours costing lots of fuel.
- If plane X is just as efficient at .83 as plane B is at .81, plane X has the edge in relative fuel economy, since it flies the same distance in less time and burns relatively less fuel.
- Being able to go faster gives more flexibility to get and keep your optimum cruising level. If you're a 777 doing .84 and there's another 777 on your tail, no problem. If you're an A340 doing .82 being overtaken by a 777 doing .84, you may be required to descend, climb or some other maneuver to allow the faster plane to pass. The other way around: a faster plane can easily slow down, a slower plane has a harder time speeding up (less efficient). Especially over the ocean on perscribed tracks, you may be stuck at a lower level for hours and hours costing lots of fuel.
Saturday, December 03, 2005
The Seattle Times: Boeing/aerospace: Boeing beefs up lead over Airbus
The Seattle Times: Boeing/aerospace: Boeing beefs up lead over Airbus: "Even before the Cathay win, Boeing had booked 109 firm new orders for 777s this year, compared with 14 orders for A340s. "