This NEW Airbus is BIG PROBLEM for Boeing! Here's Why...

This NEW Airbus is BIG PROBLEM for Boeing! Here's Why...
===
00:00 Intro
00:32 Boeing forcing Airbus to build A350
04:02 A350 becoming a threat to Boeing
09:43 Concluding
===
#fligavia #boeing #airbus #a350 #airbus350
===
This NEW Airbus is BIG PROBLEM for Boeing! Here's Why...
The Airbus A3 50 has been unveiled as Airbus's trump card in the ongoing battle for supremacy in the aviation industry. Initially, Airbus did not want to build this aircraft as a completely new design because their original plan was to develop it as an upgrade of the existing A3 30. In fact, it was Boeing who made Airbus decide to turn the A3 50 into reality. So how come this unexpected aircraft not only challenges but also threatens to end Boeing's long-standing dominance? We’ll find out in this video.
This NEW Airbus is BIG PROBLEM for Boeing! Here's Why...
The development of the Airbus A3 50 can be seen as a direct consequence of Boeing's pioneering work with the 7 8 7 Dreamliner, which was the first commercial aircraft to extensively use carbon composite materials for its construction. In the early 2000’s, Airbus was initially resistant to adopting a composite fuselage for their new aircraft and one of the main reasons was the company’s extensive experience and success with metallic airframes.
This NEW Airbus is BIG PROBLEM for Boeing! Here's Why. Composites, while offering advantages such as weight reduction and increased fuel efficiency, also presented challenges in terms of production, maintenance, and certification. Airbus had to ensure that the new materials could meet the rigorous safety and durability standards required for commercial aviation. The company needed to develop new manufacturing processes, testing procedures, and maintenance practices for composite structures, which required substantial investment in research and development.

[@cellevangiel5973]

Airbus is not the Boeing problem. Boeing is it's own problem so don't blame the competition. They were the first in the race, but stumbled over their own feet.

[@georgeszurbach444]

Didn't realize Boeing was still considered an Airbus competitor.Which Boeing planes actually competes with the Airbus line up?

[@mmb811]

6:38 not to mention Boeing's ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM inherent issues of putting PROFIT$ OVER SAFETY, which seems not to be changing anytime soon

[@cellevangiel5973]

The carbon - aluminium body panels are a Fokker NL product who make them in size and shape. And that was developed for the A380 so they had the knowledge and technology.

[@terencereeder9830]

Make your mind up ,another video you were saying the A350 was virtually finished ?

[@hakanevin8545]

Airbus has much more experience in composite materials than Boeing. Way back in the beginning of '70s, Airbus was using composite materials in their aircraft, i.e. A300. Airbus was indeed reluctant to develop A350, because they are always terrible to read the market. For example: A380 was an engineering success, but a financial flop. Not the same company, but the same people developed an engineering marvel, Concorde, but it was a commercial failure as well. There are other examples like lack of an A350-800, but you get the point.

[@FLIGAVIA]

thanks for your feedback!

[@GThu1]

But they were spot on with the A300, A320, A320neo and I would count the A220 as well (and the A220-500 may be a positive suprise in the future). Boeing is just run after those aircrafts, especially after A300 and A320neo. So with these, I wouldn't say they are terrible. Boeing had lot of successes in their long history, but they had spectatular failures, like the 7007, 747SP, 7J7, the result of the missed 7J7: 737MAX, probably the 727 as well.

[@hakanevin8545]

@@GThu1 I think you need some aviation history lesson. And that is not too far history. - A300 was struggling to sell at the beginning. 1974 Oil Crisis saved it. - In 2008 two engine manufacturers, CFM and P&W separately announced their revolutionary engines. The new engines would be 15-20% more fuel efficient than existing ones. A320 sales were behind 737 sales at that time. So you expect Airbus to adapt those engines immediately to catch Boeing, right? Wrong! Airbus waited TWO AND A HALF YEARS until the end of 2010 when Bombardier C Series (now A220) which was using the new P&W engine started to threaten their market share and only then A320Neo was born. - A220 was presented to Airbus in golden tray for just $1! And that is Canadian dollar! - A350 was developed only after customers declared that they would not buy the "new" aircraft based on A300/330/340 fuselage. So don't tell me Airbus is good in reading the market. Airbus is doing very well now, because Boeing has been even worse than Airbus in the last 25 years.

[@GThu1]

@@hakanevin8545 @hakanevin8545 A300: My statment may still be true, even if an oil crisis made it successful. Success depends on external factors as well. Don't you think they were made the first twin-engine, wide-body aircraft with fuel-economy in mind? Boeing followed. Because of the crisis. The A320neo: they still adapted the engine 5 years before Boeing did. In contrast to Boeing, they did it by recognising it's importance and demand, not because a major airline threaten them. Also, they had far better fitting aircraft for it. Boeing forced to follow. A220: As far as I know, Boeing had opportunity, even before Airbus. Even for $1, it was a huge risk (the price wasn't a typo). Looking back from now, everything looks different of course. A350: I didn't mention this type, but the implementation is not much to do with determining the right demand. They did the right thing and built a new aircraft. Boeing followed, and was far slower. About the conclusion: yes your statement is true, but failong is the norm in this industry, so staying afloat is a feat actually. Airbus got the prize. Will Boeing follow?

[@tomdavis8757]

Actually Boeings woes aren’t helping Airbus like people think. Most model Airbus planes have long backlogs and deliveries are years. People like to say airlines should just switch to Airbus from Boeing but it’s not that simple

[@zEpiiCJeeDoxD]

great video! could you provide the source for saudia's potential deal to buy the Airbus A350s?

[@FLIGAVIA]

sorry I can't post the link but you can find some from Reuters

[@mmb811]

Great Informative video

[@FLIGAVIA]

Thanks for your support!

[@icare7151]

Very well stated and presented. Thank you for your great videos!

[@FLIGAVIA]

thank you!

[@eduardodaquiljr9637]

How many A350 1000 sold compare to 777?

[@AlfCalson]

✈️

[@thetransportdude7408]

u deserved my sub from this video

[@FLIGAVIA]

Thanks so much for your support!

[@raymondmifsud4690]

The only link i could find from rueters was that of October'22, always if I am correct. If so, i believe this article was supersided by Saudia/Riyadh air ordering the B787 Instead, again subject to my understanding, and could be very wrong. 10Q.

[@joshuafergusonrc7939]

It be worse for Boeing if or when Airbus develops A350 neo!

[@nickolliver3021]

they wont get an a350neo

[@hakanevin8545]

Not Neo, but probably it will be A350 Ultra, if RR can develop their UltraFan. We can also see an A350-2000 then.

[@artrandy]

@@nickolliver3021 You must have heard that RR are upgrading all the Trents, it doesn't matter what its called......

[@nickolliver3021]

@@artrandy they only have the ultra fan. Upgrading the trents doesn't mean there will be a neo of the a350

[@artrandy]

@@nickolliver3021 As I said bro, it doesn't matter what its called. Im not going to argue over semantics......

[@goldmembership9063]

Qatar is one name that I hear always get mispronounced 😂

[@Ratty-god]

Lol the landing gear will destroy boeing

[@jonathanchau5087]

I hope Boeing goes under and that the people on the line do regular American style work, basically not give a shit and do things half ass like I did when I worked a line. Remember Boeing workers you never got anything so do Homer Simpson style work

[@nickolliver3021]

They will never go under

[@jonathanchau5087]

Well I can help it make it worse and apply for a job on the line and do my typical has ass work

[@krzysztofmichasieroslawski2682]

Composite materials use program derives from Eurofighter Typhoon development, not Airbus 350.

[@foobarmaximus3506]

lol - No.

[@GermanGreetings]

Airbus is not the long term problem for Boeing.

[@miquel440]

Come on,stop this nonsense. Based on no facts at all. Bs clickbait.

[@jacobboyd7522]

Lol its A350 and its 11 years old... B777x will domniate the next decade..

[@adrianbriggs7028]

No... it won't... 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@artrandy]

Its an updated design, the 787 is more advanced. Its yesterdays aviation.........

[@tomdavis8757]

Well I very much doubt it will ever enter production so the specifications are irrelevant

[@fransezomer]

Airbus already used composite materials in the A380's wings. Without the use of composite materials the A380 would not fly... So it was not BECAUSE of the 787 launch that Airbus started the A350 conposite developments, but rather a natural progression.

[@hakanevin8545]

Airbus used composite materials way back in 1970s, in A300.

[@fransezomer]

@@hakanevin8545 good point!