It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by waynos
I think that is the point of it zion,the 5% improvement for the A320 is a minimum change retrofit upgrade and much more cost effective investing in an all new fleet...
Flight
According to industrial sources, Boeing has accelerated the pace of the 737RS study effort and even plans to make its initial pass on prospective supplier teams by mid-2006. The RS/Y1 concept is based around an all-composite 787-like structure, fly-by-wire, more-electric system architecture, EVS-integrated avionics flightdeck, and a cabin cross-section “wider than A320”. Aerodynamic improvements include a longer span wing, single-slotted flaps, raked and blended-winglet wingtip options, blended fin root and 787-like Section 41 (nose and flightdeck).
Initial results from both NSR and RS/Y1 studies have, apparently, been less than stellar. Acting completely independently, the two studies have come up with similar results for their individual concepts, which fall far short of the ideal targets set for the 2012 timeframe airliner.
Airbus NSR Phase 1 results, for example, are believed to have indicated that if all the advanced technology (available and considered mature and sufficiently low-risk for entry into service in 2012) was poured into the aircraft, the best specific fuel consumption reduction would be 4%, the best operating cost reduction 3% and the best emissions reduction would be 5%. The numbers are also said to be within 0.5-1% for all parameters for the initial phases of Boeing’s RS/Y1.
These results therefore mean the aggregate benefit of all the combined results indicates a maximum efficiency improvement of only around 9-10% over the current A320/737 models. Given the estimated $7 billion development pricetag (airframe, systems and engine technology) involved in the NSR, insiders say Airbus in particular is asking if the venture is “too much, too soon”.
While this would, on the face of it, dent the hopes of anyone hoping to see a new generation in the near term, mid-term market pressure could still force the issue. There are some operators such as Southwest Airlines that have openly called for the start of work on a new aircraft to counter the rising cost of fuel, even if the improvement is “only” around 10% better than today’s aircraft.
Originally posted by JIMC5499
It might help sell new aircraft, but I don't think that it is going to go over so well with modifying existing aircraft. Take the 5% fuel savings and weigh it against the costs of conversion plus the increased flying time on the airframes while they are being rotated out for conversion. I don't think it will make financial sense.
Originally posted by waynos
But think of the expense and aggravation of buying and introducing a whole new fleet for just another 5%, thats what won't make financial sense, Airbus hopes.
Most A320 operators probably wont bother, as you say, but for those contemplating buying the Y3 for a 10% improvement over the current fleet Airbus will be waiting in the wings whispering "we'll give you 50% of the cost savings for only 5% of the price and in a quarter of the time. Have you seen our 'A390' projections by the way?"
[edit on 20-6-2006 by waynos]
Originally posted by JIMC5499
It might help sell new aircraft, but I don't think that it is going to go over so well with modifying existing aircraft. Take the 5% fuel savings and weigh it against the costs of conversion plus the increased flying time on the airframes while they are being rotated out for conversion. I don't think it will make financial sense.
Plus like I said before, they don't need it. Airlines are happy with the plane as it is right now...Why invest money in it? they are beating the 737 by a wide margin.