777 answer to A350

Flight International has a May 14 story we’ve just seen (we were out of town) about Boeing’s possible response to the Airbus A350-1000. This may be found here.

The most interesting thing to us is the timeline: within three-four years after Boeing gains clarity on the A350-1000, or perhaps by around 2018-19. Or, Boeing suggested, three or four years after the A350 EIS, currently forecast by Airbus as 2013 for the -900 model (the -1000 EIS is slated for 2015 and the -800 in 2014).

This matches our timeline suggestion to the Economic Development Council of Snohomish County (Everett, WA, where the 777 is built) in our speech in April. We said any decision by Boeing for a 777RS with a replacement would have to be made five-seven years in advance of EIS.

We told the EDC crowd of about 130 that they have until this launch date to persuade Boeing that building the airplane here in Puget Sound (Seattle) makes the most sense.

We said the clock is ticking–and it is. Wake up, people!

4 Comments on “777 answer to A350

  1. Ticking on what?

    Boeing needs to drop the coy routine and spell it out. There is ZERO point, in spending time, money, and effort on retaining them whem what they want is unknown. It leads to proposals that are either insufficiant or excessive.

    Clarity is the order of the day. Not a bidding war.

    • huh? Boeing answers to you now?! Boeing needs to focus on the current issues which are, 787 and 747-8. They can wait on the 777 refresh or 777 replacement later. They have 5+ more years to deal with the A350 on the top end.

  2. Boeing 777 NO answer to A350

    Boeing 777 NO answer to A350

    It is a common misbelief, that aircrafts are being judged by aviation companies along their price, comfort, beauty and such things.
    In reality, there are only two criteria, by which an airplane is chosen: Fuel Consumption and
    Safety. Even if an airplane costs $300 million on purchase, in service it will consume fuel worth several times this amount during its lifetime.

    Boeing 777 is a nice airplane, but it has two major disadvantages: Due to its fuselage made from aluminum, it is quite heavy, thus consuming vast amounts of fuel.
    Its ratio of body weight vs. payload is relatively bad.
    Also, the 777 construction and electronics are already a bit outdated.
    Modern airplanes fly by wire, pneumatics is reduced to some rare special cases.
    Modern airplanes are constructed for maximum servicability, fuel efficiency, over-all and in-flight safety.
    Older airplanes miss most of these goals, even if they are very inexpensive on purchase. They are guzzling too much fuel, are too loud, are too costly in service and correspondingly unattractive to investors.

    • yeah…the 777 “gas guzzler”. All those poor triple 7 operators, what will they do with all those horrible aircraft?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.