Date: 27 Jun 97 15:37:16 From: Chuanga@cris.com (H Andrew Chuang) Organization: Concentric Internet Services References: 1 2 3 4 Followups: 1
View raw article or MIME structure
In article <airliners.1997.1312@ohare.Chicago.COM>, Malcolm Weir <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: [snip] >A lot of people seem to be running around saying Airbus needs to redesign >this or that part of the A330/A340 family in order to achieve specific >goals. But so what? Boeing redesigned the 747's wing for the -400, and >modified the fuse for the -300, and it looks like they're adding 3.96m to >the wings of the 777-200 for the -200X and increasing its MTOW to 333Tonnes. Please don't equate a half-a-billion-dollar project (i.e., the B777-200X/300X) to a three-billion-dollar project (i.e., the A340-500/600). Yes, the B777-200X needs a wing extension, but it's not as expensive as the A340-500 which needs a new wing. >But the 777-200X seems to have hit a bit of a brick wall in that the engine >manufacturers apparently aren't willing to commit to the effort to deliver >power plants in excess of 454kN (102,000lb). I think you're right about this. GE has basically pulled itself out of the competition. (Ironically, the GE90 arguably is the most ideal engine for the high thrust applications.) However, I think with a little marketing ingenuity on Boeing's part, this problem can be solved. >Every product has growth "jumps", and the 777 is not immume, anymore than >the A330 is. The latter was in service first, and perhaps Airbus considered >the time-to-service-introduction more important than building growth into >various parts of the initial design. As Boeing, Douglas and Airbus have all >shown, growth CAN be built into a design AFTER it enters service... You have a valid argument. OTOH, in another follow-up, a poster cited a counter example, i.e., the L-1011 vs. DC-10. I don't think there is a clear cut answer. However, Boeing has always been designing planes with growth in mind. Airbus tends to tailor its design for a specific market. Perhaps that's why Airbus has criticized Boeing for "compromising" its designs. I personally think Boeing's approach makes more sense.