it`s just that making assumptions without specific numbers is silly, and whatever the actual purchase price difference is you will want to compare to operating costs, per seat, etc.

Those numbers will never be in the public domain. Ever.

Even the list prices are just that… numbers on a list – they don’t have too much relevance to the actual prices.

Airlines will have to balance the savings on the upfront purchase against greater risk in MRO, potential fuel savings/costs* and re-training in comparison to various other options.

*which requires a fuel price forecast over the aircraft’s life. Anyone fancy speculating the price of kerosene in 15 years time?

Well sure, and I can see COMAC offering VEEERY nice deals just to build market share (and cerain discount airlines are extra glad to oblige). But it`s more that I don`t even see that argument being made… Perhaps it`s just the assumption, but it seems reasonable to expound on that assumption, right? …Backing it up with numbers comparison over life-time, etc…

There are numbers out and about.

At list price, an A320NEO is ~$95 million IIRC.

An MS-21 has a target price of $35 million.

The C-919 will have an even cheaper price.

I believe that the open rotor is going to come a lot earlier than 2030… A lot earlier.

I would really like to comment on this… but. 🙂

Airbus is a step ahead in the development game and can position it self to counter Boeings counter moves easily I believe. Although admittidly it will have to get rid of the A400M some how as that seems to be a massive drain on its resources according to the FT.Com articles.

I was of the opinion the A400M was a disaster, indeed, as a technical program, it still is a bloody disaster. However, I’m now firmly of the belief that A400M will eventually turn into a massive cash cow for Airbus.

Look at the age of the current C-130 fleet… and the C-5 fleet… even the C-17 fleet.

The only options in town are (1)another C-130 – which is hardly a significant advance over the current capability, (2) the AN-70, with its associated MRO problems and (3) the A400M.

I wouldn’t pay too much heed to the market analysts – most of them are useless. While they may be right every so often, even a broken clock is right twice a day.

2. Develop an all new 737 replacement aircraft for EIS around 2018-2020.

So what do you do when propfan equipped competitors enter the market in ~2030 and have a 25% reduction in fuel consumption?

Design another all new frame less than 10 years after delivering the first 2020 one?

The biggest issue on the acquisition it not something John Leahy can control, and that’s the Unions.

Can they dictate what aircraft an airline purchases? :confused:

If Airbus does open a new line..why could it not be in the UK?

New assembly lines cannot be opened if they cannot get enough components to assemble! 🙂

😉

🙂

So what hides the exhaust plume ejecting at > 1000K?

The IR signature detected by IRSTs etc is not just, indeed, its not mainly the engine itself, or the combustor. It is the radiation from the hot CO2, CO and H2O that the sensors track.