Re: A330-300HGW & new gear

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
Next article
View raw article
  or MIME structure

In article <airliners.1997.1312@ohare.Chicago.COM>,
Malcolm Weir <malc@mci2000.com> 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.