Re: A3XX vs B747-600

From:         faurecm@halcyon.com (C. Marin Faure)
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc.
Date:         08 Oct 96 13:00:09 
References:   1 2 3 4
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1996.1957@ohare.Chicago.COM>, jfmezei@videotron.ca wrote:

> C. Marin Faure wrote:
> > It depends on your definition of new.  From an aerodyamic standpoint, all
> > the fuselage does is keep the wind out of your face.  So if you take a
> > fuselage that happens to already be perfect for its purpose, add a brand
> > new wing using the best aerodynamic knowledge in existance today, put on
> > state-of-the-art, high-bypass fanjets, and add the most advanced and
> > reliable airplane systems in the world, it sounds like a new airplane to
> > me.  It may LOOK like a 747, and that's what we're going to call it, but
> > as far as its performance and capabilities go, it's a new airplane.
>
>
> So, if this is to be a "new" plane in terms of development costs, in
> what way does Boeing have an advantage over Airbus ?

Well, the fuselage design is already done and paid for in large part, in
terms of the cross-section, configuration, interior, and structural
layout, thanks to the previous members of the 747 family.  And as I
mentioned in an earlier post, one of the largest expenses in creating a
new airplane is designing and manufacturing the tooling needed to build
it.  Even though much of the new 747s will be just that...new... we will
be able to use a lot of the existing 747 tooling, saving a lot of money in
the process, cost savings that will be reflected in the purchase price of
the airplane.

And the same things that help reduce development costs also accelerate the
development and delivery times, another benefit to the operators.

C. Marin Faure
   author, Flying a Floatplane