Favorite Large Aircraft

[East West Airlines]

I agree... the 787 would have been much smarter.

[ba4]

The 787 is not good to me, I love the A350XWB.

[ba4]

Please vote again!

[1993matias]

Why?

[ba4]

It reset.

[Virgin Serbia]

It reset.

Why on earth did you reset it? It's not like you haven't got the answers one time already. This isn't meant to be a game, it's meant to be a dead serious survey to see what aircraft people like most

[ba4]

A350 is gonna the BEST aircraft out there when it comes out (hence my username) but for now the beautiful and profitable A330.

Agree.

Signed.
Airbus.

[Virgin Serbia]

A350 is gonna the BEST aircraft out there when it comes out (hence my username) but for now the beautiful and profitable A330.

Agree.

Signed.
Airbus.

Apples and oranges. It will be the best aircraft for the role it was made for. It will under no circumstances be better (or worse) than a 737 or A380.
Besides, as i mentioned the A350-1000 won't have the range or cargo capacity to outperform the 777-300ER, and the A350-900 won't outperform the 777-200LR. The A350-800 will have a very high CASM compared to the 787-9.

But the A350-900 will certainly be better than the 777-200ER and A340-300, so if your airline doesn't need the extra range of the 777-200LR, it is the best choice.
If you only plan on flying medium range routes with the A350-1000 it will be better than the -300ER.

I believe we will find the market shared 50/50 between the A350-1000 and 777-300ER, while the A359/777-200LR will be 90/10 for the A350. The 789 vs A358 will turn out around 75/25 in favour of the 787.   

[Mastafa]

Complex...

[Virgin Serbia]

Complex...

It's rather simple. Why do you want to buy a plane that can do more than you need it to do?

[ba4]

But the A350-900 will certainly be better than the 777-200ER and A340-300, so if your airline doesn't need the extra range of the 777-200LR, it is the best choice.
If you only plan on flying medium range routes with the A350-1000 it will be better than the -300ER.


[/quote]
Airbus are planning a long range version of the A350, which will provide British Airways with its need to launch non-stop services to Auckland, and Airbus have been working on the A350-900R.

As well, the A350-100 is better than the 300ER. It is lighter, it is made out of carbon-fibre. It is better than the 777.

The share is true: 60/40 for the A350-1000 and B777-300ER, 90/10 for the A359/B77W, and 70/30 for the A358/789

[Mastafa]

Complex...

It's rather simple. Why do you want to buy a plane that can do more than you need it to do?

I mean that it is long and has *helpful* info

[AirbusGuy350]

The share is true: 60/40 for the A350-1000 and B777-300ER, 90/10 for the A359/B77W, and 70/30 for the A358/789

The 77W is the same as the 777-300ER and the A35J (A350-1000) has only 75 orders compared to the 777-300ER's total of 453 orders. The major problem with the A350 is the engine. The RR Trent-XWB cannot power an aircraft 77W sized. In my opinion Airbus should make 2 versions of the A35J a normal and HGW version for which RR upgrades the Trent-XWB. As for 787 vs. A350 they barely compete and I think that having both in your fleet is the best option look at airlines with A332's and 777's, it will just be flipped flopped.

[Virgin Serbia]

Airbus are planning a long range version of the A350, which will provide British Airways with its need to launch non-stop services to Auckland, and Airbus have been working on the A350-900R.

No they are not. When they launch it you can argue for it, but it hasn't been launched yet. So far it is nothing but A.net rumour. Besides, the economics of operating such a small plane on such a long route is daunting, at best of times.

As well, the A350-100 is better than the 300ER. It is lighter, it is made out of carbon-fibre. It is better than the 777.

That does not make it better. The A350-1000 will have the engines that were made for the smaller variants, hence it won't have enough power to haul enough fuel out of the airport. Without enough fuel, it can't fly far enough. The 777-300ER also has a phenomenal cargo capacity (in fact, i can carry more than the A380) so the A350 is also at a disadvantage here. The A350XWB is simply too narrow to carry enough cargo.
If Rolls Royce decides to add a power upgrade to the Trent XWB, it might be able to surpass the 77W, but until then it can't. Of course, it has considerably lower operating costs, especially on shorter routes, which will make it very popular in Asia and with the Middle Eastern carriers on routes to Europe. It will also be the best on transatlantic routes.
The 77W will win on the Far-East to Europe routes, Europe to western US and Transpacific routes.      

The share is true: 60/40 for the A350-1000 and B777-300ER, 90/10 for the A359/B77W, and 70/30 for the A358/789

Disagree. The A350-1000 in it's current form can't perform most of the routes flown by the 777-300ER, so it will be 50/50.

The 787-9 will outsell the A350-800 simply because it offers lower operating costs. It's no different from the A330-300 vs. 777-200A. The small plane that is stretched is more optimised than the big plane that has been shrinked. And the A350-800 won't even have the range advantage of the 777 vs A330.

The 777-200A sold 88 planes. The A330-300 has so far sold 500+. And the 777-200A is a newer plane with newer technologies.

In my opinion Airbus should make 2 versions of the A35J a normal and HGW version for which RR upgrades the Trent-XWB.

I'd tend to agree, but only last week Airbus denied developing a higher powered variant. I also doubt RR will want to develop a new engine right at the moment. Perhaps when the 787 is delivered and the engine is working...

[Mastafa]

I agree with Virgin Serbia.
The A350-1000 has the same maximum capacity as a 777-300/ER it me be somehow more advanced but can't really compete with the range of the 777-300ER or their own model, the A340-600. That plane would act better between transatlantic routes.

The A350-800 is not really capable of actually making airline's profit because it can fit little passengers over such a long range, ticket prices would be quite high, and fuel costs would certainly eat up most of the A358's profit, and the small number of passengers won't give much. Once again, it is more of a 767 or A330 competitor best on transatlantic routes eg. JFK-BRU

The 787 has much more popularity since it's just released. It seems more airlines are buying the 787. The 787 is really suitable on routes within a continent. It's operating costs are low and may/may not be as advanced as the A350, but is certainly more efficient and low-cost.

 that was a long one