I’ve seen of lot of videos like this one lately that are more infomercial than real news, that are stuffed full of corporate sounding repetitious nonsense. I guess one good thing is you can get the message after about 30 seconds and can switch it off knowing you won’t learn anything else.
One thing to Airbus' advantage is passenger confidence in Boeing fleet. With all the negative press regarding safety issues with Boeing's planes, however unfounded, passengers could lose confidence in their reliability.
12:51 - No, I'm not concerned with aircraft emissions when flying. Carbon dioxide is plant food and greens the planet. Furthermore, there is a strong link between solar cycles and atmospheric temperature. As for the carbon dioxide levels, they actually lag rises and falls in atmospheric temperature; when temperatures rise the oceans out-gas more carbon dioxide, raising atmospheric levels.
I'm no aviation expert, but increasing the capacity by 40 seats in economy ? Doesn't sound to me like something that a manufacturer would see as worthwhile from a financial point of view. Airbus will focus on the their 350 F, next gen aircraft, higher efficiency, sustainable fuels, etc. I'd say this is click bait, which I fell for.
An A350-2000 is all very well until you realise that there is no spare capacity with which to build it. The A350 is sold out until about 2030, the A350F will pick up steady orders, and with rumours of new orders from Emirates, Qatar and others for passenger and/or freight A350s, that will keep the line busy until an A350Neo can be built in the early 2030s, to replace aircraft ordered now. With RR upgrading all the Trents, with arguably the most important being the XWB-97 for the improved A350-1000, I cannot believe Airbus will spend money to compete any further with their existing aircraft, for which they have hundreds of orders. I did seem likely that this would happen, but the vast order book for the A350 accrued in 2023/4, now makes this very unlikely........
Not sure whether it's that simple as just stretching the fuselage. There could be a problem with tailtrikes and also there might be the need for an entirely new wing that would provide the lift to accommodate those extra 40 pax
This is all supposition, Airbus has not indicated that it will build a A350-2000. It has said, it will wait to see how the market responds. Right now Airbus is not struggling for orders but struggling with its suppliers, who even now, after two years after Covid have still not caught up. Building yet another aircraft with the supply chain so bad is fraught with financial pit falls. Airbus are wise to hang back, there aren't enough orders to warrant another Aircraft just to placate a ignorant media.
Airbus needs to address the single Engin option of the 1000 first, if they are able to have an alternative for a 2000 series, for sure it would probably work. But obviously, they want to avoid another A380 like loss.
The existing A350 is sold out until 2030, so why would Airbus be interested in an expensive engine option (presumably GE), just to sell a few A350s to US airlines that want US engines when, apart from Delta, the A350 has been a huge success around the world, without US sales. Airbus simply cannot increase production more than they're doing already. So more US sales apart from DL are unlikely. In Feb 24, AA were reported interested again, but nothing came of it. United have it on order starting 2027 delivery, and if they're sensible, they'll take them, or they could sell their slots to other airlines. That's the only forseen flexibility. I realise why GE might want a slice of A350 action, with the 777X going nowhere now until maybe 2027/8, but GE already refused to build an engine for the A350-1000 during development. They snubbed Airbus, and I think Airbus would be most reluctant to allow GE onboard again, especially with the new uprated XWB-97 for the A350-1000 due, which will increase time on the wing, a problem for desert based airlines. There is no sensible reason for any engine option on the A350 right now. RR are doing great, and oh, they have an exclusive until 2030, at least...........
Dear "FLIG AVIA" - pls. consider no longer to overload your videos by too many tracks that lead away from the core topic (i.e. here the envisioned A350-2000)
The fuselage cannot be stretched indefinitely. The landing gears and wings have to be overdesigned to begin with. The fuselage itself has to have enough strength to withstand extra stress due to new weight and increased dimension from nose gear to main landing gears. The engines have to be more powerful as well.
Are you trying to tell the story of aviation? Why not mention the Wright siblings? You're telling to much fluff befor you get to the story mentioned in the title.
Airbus has the ability to build this and kill Boeing but they are not going to do that simply because they don’t want to do that, being the sole main manufacturer of all planes will only lead to destruction because that’s just how businesses work, the airbus ceo says that he does not delight in Boeings hardships because he values their competition and what they bring to the market, as he says they should be working together to bring quality aviation products.
I would like to see the A380 900 back into production .. But it would be cheaper to bring the A350--2000 instead and would be better better than the Boeing 777X .
The A380-900 had been the visionary stretch version that was never finalized,. The decision to develop and produce a new airliner needs approval of many stakeholders, beginning with the full Executive Management and the Board of Directors (these institutions are usually separated in Europe, unlike in the USA). Potential creditors would raise eyebrows, and financial analysts would bash the company and send the stock nosedive. After the commercial failure of the original A380 and the dismanteling of the manufacturing system, it would be completely impossible to get a new positive decision.
I give not one iota of a damn on how much emmisions a plane uses, we need planes and we want planes, i don't care if they don't come up with a new form or fuel for 500 years.
I wish Indonesia add more AIRBUS types over BOEING for the future of developed country ever for Indonesia on 2045 years later. Especially Garuda Indonesia as I need except for Lion air, maybe just choose BOEING be the world's most worst airline ever as I hate it. Also, for military industry and Presidential plane for replacing BOEING to AIRBUS it's been great than ever exist.
@@albertogambino2562 Look again, closely. The "topic" is about stretching an aircraft for greater capacities when the industry was going the other way, causing Airbus to stop or cancel its existing large capacities series: the A340 and the A380, respectively, each flying on 4 engines. It seems that everybody is jumping in the navgeek bandwagon without any clue what aviation and its history are about. A little knowledge about airplanes could easily turn this channel into a valuable resource of information about the aviation industry. The A350 came about after multiple decisions to respond not just to fuel efficiency but to more contemporary environment matters. Gathering data, videos and documents is just one aspect of the work behind the scene before even publishing a well polished, carefully articulated video.
It is clear and will happen very soon, plasma energy will be used by every day households and will be free energy (No long need to pay bills), surely the aviation industry can utilise this too right?
"Environmentally friendly". This word should be banned for aircraft. This 777x is only more fuel efficient than other aircraft, but it is by no means environmentally friendly. It still needs 70,000 liters for a long-haul flight. This is a disaster for the environment. You can't make this toxic machine look better than it actually is. It is simply the less environmentally harmful choice, but that doesn't make it "environmentally friendly".
The Boeing 777X is in no way more fuel efficient than any Airbus commercial airliner ! The Airbus A350 and A330neo are more fuel efficient than the Boeing 777X The A350 has lower operating costs than the 777-200 and -300 variants. Airbus states that the A350 is the most eco-efficient aircraft in its category, with 25% less fuel burn and CO2 emissions per seat. A330neo The A330neo has comparable fuel efficiency to the 787. The A330neo is reliable and versatile, and has a longer range than the B787.
