How a -2000 stretch to add 50 seats means 6 extra rows in economy (9 abreaast seating) to compete in capacity with the 777-9 - which is expected to have 10 abreast in economy. I wonder what the largest possible stretch is without the a350 requiring major wing/structure redesign or engine upgrades.
There has never been a dash 2000 (-2000) project at Airbus for any of its models. I asked the question last July airshow at Farnborough and Airbus has no intention to do so as all its "neo versions" have reached their maximum length whichever model is concerned such as the A-330 or A-350 as well as their maximum percentage of composite material have been reached for their wings, tails or fuselages. Airbus is planning to make a final extension of its A-321XLR providing between 48 and 72 additional seats which will be named A-322neo. It is also planning to extend the A-220 to a dash 500 which would provide carriers with only 32 more passengers but carriers would have to show their interest into such endeavor. The only way to extend the A-350 or A-330neo would entail to lower the percentage of composite material and make their aircraft a lot heavier with quite lower range. In the questioning by other participant, it was assessed that Airbus is providing an aircraft for each and every actual market segments.
Not sure about the prospects of a freighter version. Aluminium is cheaper to repair than carbon, and freighters seem to be quite frequently damaged by ground equipment.
Makes sense. Airbus has a problem with multiple aircraft types competing for similar market. No one is buying the A330-800, and now they essentially replaced it with the A321XLR, if you can call it a replacement. There's a similar situation with the A319neo, which has esentially been replaced/userped by the A220-300 after the acquisition of the CSeries from Bombardier.
True. Its a nice problem to have when conditions are ideal. But, at the moment, some are more efficient than others, thus leading to cannibalised sales for the not so efficient variants. I guess in the long term, they will streamline the variants. A stretched A220-500 will compete with the A320neo.
The whole numbering schema of the sub-models is just stupid. Starting with the -900 leaves no room for growth. They should have started with a much lower number, but in this world, where a small cup is called "large"....
If Airbus wants to rival the 777-9, their current efforts to do that might make the A350-2000 redundant. They have redesigned the sidewalls, which they anticipate will make more airlines adopt 3-4-3 in economy class. If a sufficient amount of full-service airlines does that, then there is no point for a -2000. Heck, maybe Airbus doesn’t really want to make a plane that big, similar to how Boeing didn’t really see the case for a MOM plane back in the 2000s and early 2010s.
Airbus should launch a simple, cheap stretch, using the extra weight of the A350ULR. My A350-1100 would only have a few extra rows of seats, swapping capacity for range, as long as still has at least the same range as the Boeing 777-200-ER.
More airlines want an A350-900/1000 compared to ones that want a A350-2000 / 777X size of aircraft. The -900/1000 are already flying off the shelves, there is no reason to cater to the few when you've already captured the masses from a business perspective. Not to mention passengers as of late are leaning toward preference of departure times, which favors smaller less capacity aircraft.
the A350-900 is the Super Star of Airbus. A350-1000 a failure. due to the unique RR engines installed, therefore, Airbus will not jump into building the 2000 version.
I doubt there will be a stretched A350 without a new engine to power it. The studies were theoretical, the reality on the ground from flying A350s shows different data - eg shorter on-the-wing timeline engine on the A350K. Most airlines will not be happy with an underpowered but huge aircraft.
The A350-2000, or stretch, will have to wait until the A350Neo is announced for the early 2030s, after the current orders for the -900 and -1000 aircraft are fulfilled. Airbus cannot make any more A350s than they have already announced, and therefore they do not have a production facility for this stretch right now. The A350 is virtually sold out. Airbus are tweaking the 350 design to accomodate customers like Qantas, and there is the A350F of course, but its all about manufacturing capacity, or lack of. It really is as simple as that.....
How can planes be sold out if they are built from scratch? I know that different entities/companies build different parts for the plane but since these things are built from materials how can it be sold out?
@@JungleJetAviation06 Airbus produce 6 A350s per month, and they anticipate they will be able to increase that to 10 a month by 2026. This is the most advanced civil aircraft in service, its not like producing plastic toothbrushes, where they just up production with a flick of a switch and put more plastic pellets into a large vat. Any increase in the capacity of the A350, requires the hiring and training of many more technical employees than are immediately available. I indicated that it was virtually sold out until the early 2030s. Some unannounced orders are in the pipeline, other orders will be topped up, so with capacity at full strength, how can they, or why would they, devote resources to an aircraft they cannot build until the 2030s..........?
@@ianloftus6692 I can see them making an A350neo with even more fuel efficient engines that go with both the -900 and -1000 than see them stretch it even further for a -2000 imho. I thought it was weird that the -1000 has different engines even tho they are RR.
Arguably, as some major customers (e.g.Emirates) are giving the A350-1000 already a pass due to engine reliability issues, a 2000 variant would probably not be be successful enough.
Emirates are waiting for the XWB-97 upgrades that power the -1000 to be confirmed by RR, before placing their order. If anyone thinks that Emirates are going to wait until eternity for the B777X to be delivered, without taking the precaution of ordering the A350-1000 as a back up, might as well be living in Neverland..........
@ganymede6535 No put they have plans to roll out updates to the Trent XWB engines starting in the beginning of 2025 through 2028 to improve performance
How a -2000 stretch to add 50 seats means 6 extra rows in economy (9 abreaast seating) to compete in capacity with the 777-9 - which is expected to have 10 abreast in economy.
I wonder what the largest possible stretch is without the a350 requiring major wing/structure redesign or engine upgrades.
Thanks for this Dj!!
There has never been a dash 2000 (-2000) project at Airbus for any of its models. I asked the question last July airshow at Farnborough and Airbus has no intention to do so as all its "neo versions" have reached their maximum length whichever model is concerned such as the A-330 or A-350 as well as their maximum percentage of composite material have been reached for their wings, tails or fuselages.
Airbus is planning to make a final extension of its A-321XLR providing between 48 and 72 additional seats which will be named A-322neo. It is also planning to extend the A-220 to a dash 500 which would provide carriers with only 32 more passengers but carriers would have to show their interest into such endeavor.
The only way to extend the A-350 or A-330neo would entail to lower the percentage of composite material and make their aircraft a lot heavier with quite lower range.
In the questioning by other participant, it was assessed that Airbus is providing an aircraft for each and every actual market segments.
Not sure about the prospects of a freighter version. Aluminium is cheaper to repair than carbon, and freighters seem to be quite frequently damaged by ground equipment.
+4m cabin length = 62m
.....looking at A340-600 configuration
What? The -1000 is already 73 metres long
A350-2000: YAY
wow
Makes sense. Airbus has a problem with multiple aircraft types competing for similar market. No one is buying the A330-800, and now they essentially replaced it with the A321XLR, if you can call it a replacement. There's a similar situation with the A319neo, which has esentially been replaced/userped by the A220-300 after the acquisition of the CSeries from Bombardier.
True. Its a nice problem to have when conditions are ideal. But, at the moment, some are more efficient than others, thus leading to cannibalised sales for the not so efficient variants. I guess in the long term, they will streamline the variants. A stretched A220-500 will compete with the A320neo.
Let’s also not forget the A350-800 that got cancelled in favor of A330NEO
What signifies a 2000 other than a stretch 1000 what is the significance are the numbers ? surely a manufacturer can give it any number
The whole numbering schema of the sub-models is just stupid. Starting with the -900 leaves no room for growth. They should have started with a much lower number, but in this world, where a small cup is called "large"....
If Airbus wants to rival the 777-9, their current efforts to do that might make the A350-2000 redundant. They have redesigned the sidewalls, which they anticipate will make more airlines adopt 3-4-3 in economy class. If a sufficient amount of full-service airlines does that, then there is no point for a -2000. Heck, maybe Airbus doesn’t really want to make a plane that big, similar to how Boeing didn’t really see the case for a MOM plane back in the 2000s and early 2010s.
Airbus should launch a simple, cheap stretch, using the extra weight of the A350ULR. My A350-1100 would only have a few extra rows of seats, swapping capacity for range, as long as still has at least the same range as the Boeing 777-200-ER.
More airlines want an A350-900/1000 compared to ones that want a A350-2000 / 777X size of aircraft. The -900/1000 are already flying off the shelves, there is no reason to cater to the few when you've already captured the masses from a business perspective. Not to mention passengers as of late are leaning toward preference of departure times, which favors smaller less capacity aircraft.
airbus stil has time, the 777x is not yet certified
Also, NO A380Neo.
However, Emirates A380Neo would be nice.
Great idea indeed!
Now only find a powerful sponsor ...
the A350-900 is the Super Star of Airbus. A350-1000 a failure. due to the unique RR engines installed, therefore, Airbus will not jump into building the 2000 version.
I doubt there will be a stretched A350 without a new engine to power it. The studies were theoretical, the reality on the ground from flying A350s shows different data - eg shorter on-the-wing timeline engine on the A350K. Most airlines will not be happy with an underpowered but huge aircraft.
With Project Sunrise… I sure hope QF does something with Y. Imagine doing SYD-JFK/LGA/EWR in the current Y seat? 🤢🤢
👍🍻
The A350-2000, or stretch, will have to wait until the A350Neo is announced for the early 2030s, after the current orders for the -900 and -1000 aircraft are fulfilled. Airbus cannot make any more A350s than they have already announced, and therefore they do not have a production facility for this stretch right now. The A350 is virtually sold out. Airbus are tweaking the 350 design to accomodate customers like Qantas, and there is the A350F of course, but its all about manufacturing capacity, or lack of. It really is as simple as that.....
How can planes be sold out if they are built from scratch? I know that different entities/companies build different parts for the plane but since these things are built from materials how can it be sold out?
@@JungleJetAviation06
Airbus produce 6 A350s per month, and they anticipate they will be able to increase that to 10 a month by 2026. This is the most advanced civil aircraft in service, its not like producing plastic toothbrushes, where they just up production with a flick of a switch and put more plastic pellets into a large vat. Any increase in the capacity of the A350, requires the hiring and training of many more technical employees than are immediately available.
I indicated that it was virtually sold out until the early 2030s. Some unannounced orders are in the pipeline, other orders will be topped up, so with capacity at full strength, how can they, or why would they, devote resources to an aircraft they cannot build until the 2030s..........?
@@artrandy Thank you for clarifying.
I would think that the 2000 variant was less economical than the 1000
@@ianloftus6692 I can see them making an A350neo with even more fuel efficient engines that go with both the -900 and -1000 than see them stretch it even further for a -2000 imho. I thought it was weird that the -1000 has different engines even tho they are RR.
It's called lack of demand.
I love Airbus! And waiting for the inauguration of the newest aircraft A350-2000
*Eventuate*
Damn i hate that outro song
Time will tell.
Arguably, as some major customers (e.g.Emirates) are giving the A350-1000 already a pass due to engine reliability issues, a 2000 variant would probably not be be successful enough.
Emirates will regret this decision. Wait and watch
Emirates are waiting for the XWB-97 upgrades that power the -1000 to be confirmed by RR, before placing their order. If anyone thinks that Emirates are going to wait until eternity for the B777X to be delivered, without taking the precaution of ordering the A350-1000 as a back up, might as well be living in Neverland..........
Didnt Rolls Royce finally fixed that problem months ago?
@ganymede6535 No put they have plans to roll out updates to the Trent XWB engines starting in the beginning of 2025 through 2028 to improve performance
@@ileshpatel390why is that, are you suggesting that the 777X will be a failure?