Airbus: August 2008 Archives

Delivery of the second Emirates Airbus A380 has been delayed at least several weeks due to supplier issues with interior outfitting, delaying introduction of the first daily A380 service to New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport.

According to sources in both Dubai and Hamburg, delivery has been delayed until October 20 "at the earliest."

The second 489-seat A380, MSN013, was intended for delivery in September for introduction on the airline's direct Dubai-New York (JFK) service on October 1. The aircraft was to replace a Boeing 777-300ER on the route to establish the first daily A380 service to the United States.

Neither Airbus nor Emirates denied the potential delivery delay.

"There may be a delay," says an US based Emirates spokesperson. "We are awaiting further details from Dubai."

Per company policy, Airbus declined to discuss delivery schedules of its aircraft, though the European airframer underscored it was still on track to have 12 A380s delivered before the close of 2008. Five A380s have been delivered this year.

Airbus revised its A380 delivery targets in May from 13 in 2008, citing a slow transition of staff from Wave 1 hand-wired aircraft to Wave 2 aircraft with production wiring.

Emirates' website still shows the A380 operating the 13 hour 45 minute route daily route beginning October 1. The route is currently operated by Emirate's first A380 (A6-EDA) with 491-seats and a Boeing 777-300ER configured with 354 or 358 seats. With the delay of entry into service of the second A380, Emirates will likely be required to boost capacity to compensate for the roughly 135-seat gap between the 777-300ER and the A380.

According to a source at the Dubai based airline, daily service is now potentially slated to commence on October 26, the same day as Qatar Airways, Emirates' regional competitor, is set to begin its daily non-stop JFK service from Doha using a 777-300ER.

Supplier issues of key items like seats, galleys and lavatories have impacted both Airbus and Boeing customers.  

Flight reported in June that buyer-furnished-equipment had delayed Boeing 777 aircraft for both Emirates and Qatar Airways.

Airbus has been impacted as well with "roughly 8% of widebody deliveries" facing "some delay because of problems with equipment purchased directly from suppliers," the Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month.

Airbus had anticipated delivering three A380s during the September, though with the delay, it appears that the first for QANTAS' and the sixth for Singapore Airlines will be the only September deliveries.

September will mark the first time Airbus delivers two A380s in the same month.

The aircraft in question first flew April 1 of this year in Toulouse and was transferred to Hamburg-Finkenwerder on April 4 where it has remained for painting, rewiring and outfitting of its custom interior, including two shower spas.

This story is part of a FlightBlogger comprehensive Airbus A380 update covering the remaining deliveries for 2008. Image courtesy of David Barrie.

With the final re-bid tanker proposals from Boeing and Northrop Grumman/EADS expected later this fall, speculation abounds that Boeing is considering offering the larger 767-400ER in place of the 767-200ERX.

The FlightBlogger art department decided to peek into the looking glass and see what a 767-400ER tanker (KC-764) would actually look like. The point of the (extremely rough) diagram is to illustrate one of the key challenges a 767-400ER platform would face. The -400ER is 42.3 feet longer than the -200ERX. The takeoff run -400ER at MTOW would be significantly longer than the -200ERX and with the addition of the refueling boom, the rotation angle could be a significant factor as well. I've (roughly) estimated that the 767-200ER would have 7.5 degree rotation angle before tail strike, but the 767-400ER would only have 4 degrees nose-up before striking the tail on the runway.

Though, Boeing has already proven itself adept at compensating for this by adding tail strike protection into the 777-300ER, reducing the aircraft's take off roll by 600 feet.

According to our friends at Leeham, "The Amended [Draft Request For Proposals] now ranks runway performance as a "3" in importance (on a scale of 1 to 3, with one being most important)." So, it may be a moot point when it's all said and done.

The original KC-767 was set to have the -400ER (777-style) flight deck, so right out of the box Boeing is able to deliver an enhanced flight deck to the USAF.

So why not choose the 767-400ER all along?

Boeing made the claim that the footprint of the tanker was key to basing flexibility. More importantly, Boeing followed the original terms of the RFP, which said it wouldn't give extra credit for a larger tanker, whereas Northrop/EADS went beyond by giving "more" to the USAF.

Looking at this through a commercial lens for a moment, the 767-200ERX was to be the platform for which the KC-767 was born from. Boeing was able to immediately turn that product into a commercial application to avoid the necessity of an ITAR waiver. They wouldn't have been able to do it as easily if the KC-767 was first.

With that inspiration in mind, the -200ERX was to live its life as a freighter in the 767-200LRF, bolstering the 767 line beyond one tanker per month. If Boeing was to round out its freighter family, then making a 767-400ER freighter, which would've been the foundation for the KC-764, Boeing would've stepped on the toes of the 777F, hardly a good product strategy.

If Boeing offers the 767-400ER, what might EADS and Northrop do? Instead of using the A330-200, the NG/EADS team might offer the A330-200F. What's the benefit? Currently, NG/EADS has to convert every A330-200 to a freighter/tanker configuration from a passenger aircraft. Switching to the A330-200F, which wasn't around when the A330-200 was first offered to the USAF, saves sizable time and cost in production. In 2007, Northrop said that it would "inevitably" switch to the A330-200F anyway; a claim Northrop later backed away from, but never denied saying it.
 
Also, the A330-200 is fitted with twin General Electric CF6 engines, though if the A330-200F is offered, NG/EADS will likely switch to Pratt & Whitney PW4000 engines that are only available along with Rolls Royce Trent 700. NG/EADS won't be offering non-US built engines.

With PW4000 engines on both Boeing and Airbus tankers, does this increase the chances of a split buy?

Wait, I've gone cross-eyed. This tanker makes my head hurt.

Pratt & Whitney has completed the first phase of flight testing for its Geared Turbofan demonstrator as it prepares to fly the engine with Airbus in September.

The GTF demonstrator amassed 43.5 hours over 12 flights that demonstrated the handling characteristics and overall performance of the engine up to 40,000 feet and .85 mach, exploring the full flight regime up to redline at 30,000 lbs of thrust.

The test programme, which began 11 July, included a robust package of accelerations and decelerations, high angle of attack takeoffs and other maneuvers, including wind up turns, as well as the starter assist and windmill relight capability of the engine.

Phase one focused on short range aircraft performance in preparation for applying the lessons learned to the Mitusbishi Regional Jet and Bombardier CSeries, both expected to enter service in 2013.

The engine "met our prediction of what the ground to altitude relationship would be" and P&W has an improved understanding of the "geared components in terms of optimizing the engine for fuel [burn]," says Bob Saia vice-president of next generation product family.

P&W achieved "near double-digit" improvements in fuel burn on the demonstrator and validates the 12-15% improvement P&W hopes to deliver in service. In addition, Saia adds that P&W is "on the path to hit the maintenance cost values we've committed to for ANA and Lufthansa," launch customers for the MRJ and CSeries.

P&W identifies three objectives for the two-month, 75-hour flight test programme with Airbus, which is set to kick-off in the second half of September on a A340-600 test bed. First, validate the data from the 747 test bed by repeating phase one conditions. Second, explore the acoustic characteristics, not a done on phase one because of the older and significantly louder P&W JT9Ds on the 747. Finally, "work closely with Airbus" to determine the ideal design for mounting engine components on the pylon to improve the aerodynamic characteristics.

The engine is scheduled for handover to Airbus during the 3rd week of August.

Airbus has distanced itself from any suggestion that its role in GTF flight testing implies future usage on a commercial platform, though Airbus Executive Vice President for Programmes Tom Williams said recently it would take 24 to 30-months to develop a GTF-powered A320 if the airframer decides to do so.

P&W says it is "on track" for the new PurePower engine family and expects detailed design work to begin when the demonstrator flight testing is complete. The non-geared PW810 engine core will begin ground testing in mid-2009, followed in December by testing for the MRJ's PW1217G and 1st quarter 2010 for the CSeries PW1524G. For the PW1000Gs, twin 40-50 hour flight test programmes are planned for the mid 3rd quarter of 2010 and "a few months later" on the PW1217G and PW1524G respectively.

Posted as written for Flight International