Would The A350neo Destroy Boeing?

[@tigersharkzh]

No need for an A350neo to destroy Boeing, they're doing it to themselves with great efficiency.

[@Tom-js3iz]

Nah they’ve learned their lesson and they are g now

[@thorstenj.9639]

Correct! Airbus should follow their own roadmap to improve their products. Considering tthat a NEO update could take 3+ year it wold be very clever to start now...

[@thomascdurham9130]

As long as Boeing is attached to The U.S. Defense tit, they will survive.

[@prasad530]

@@thorstenj.9639 Follow the same roadmap that produced the A380 failure?

[@carlosandleon]

@@Tom-js3iz lol 4 months later another Boeing fuck up came to the surface, you sure they learned their lessons bro?

[@scottbernard8824]

Sounds like Boeing's bean- counters are the real threat to Boeing.

[@timothycook2917]

What's up with the title? Neither are going to destroy. There's no end game. Both companies are producing great products for a public demand

[@navgeekaviation]

It's good to pose the question I guess

[@ant2312]

Boeing producing great products? just lol

[@Tom-js3iz]

@@ant2312 they have been for a very long time. Maybe if you weren’t such an ignorant Boeing hater you would have the mental capacity to understand

[@stoje8405]

@@ant2312 yes they are, or maybe, they used to? remind you only boeing's newer products that have heavy problems like 737max and 787 (the reason i put 787 is because boeing is moving to SC for the 787s built after this which most airline would probably decline it)

[@alaa-eldin_hamdan]

Now I see the effects of the delusional nationalistic Boeing cool aid. Boeing is a national embarrassment.

[@zacharynascimento3921]

The latest aircraft they neo’d was the a330...and it’s still relatively young, only coming out a few years before the 777.

[@FreeSoul76]

A350 the most quite and comfortable on the sky I love flying with this aircraft.

[@aseem7w9]

definitely not the most comfortable. japan airlines boeing 787 has the widest and most comfortable economy seats in the world.

[@KingofInterns]

@@aseem7w9 most 787s are 9 abreast (95% of them) this is super uncomfortable. A350 is wider and thus 9 abreast is much more comfortable. Also a350 is quieter than 787.

[@aseem7w9]

@@KingofInterns Yes I know 9 abreast 787 is bad thats why i said japan airlines 787. the a350 isnt too quiet than 787 just slightly.

[@KingofInterns]

@@aseem7w9 Thats my point :) 787 was initially designed for 8 abreast but most carriers opted for cramming in 9 abreast. This means most people associate the 787 as being too crampt. Whereas the a350 was designed to accommodate 9 abreast which currently most carriers use. 10 abreast a350 however does exist with some LCCs but luckily it is rare...

[@erikc1775]

They should start thinking about it. Even If Boeing dies, it will only take some years for others to catch up, Airbus needs to stay ahead. Although I have to be honest, I will never fly on a Chinese aircraft. Not because it is Chinese or would be of bad quality, but because it is made by a brutal regime that needs to be stopped before it becomes too powerful. I will not support that regime more than necessary. As for Russian planes, the same applies for those.

[@beavertown2006]

You are very few who see this.

[@JohnLee-]

I would much prefer the democracy bomb. Boeing are such good KILLING machine

[@prasad530]

It is ludicrous to suggest Boeing is going anywhere.

[@Sterlingjob]

It’s called the rolls Royce ultra fan , but it’s development has been put on hold because of the stupid virus

[@marvinenglish4547]

The a220 a321 xlr a350 family is the real problem to Boeing

[@andrewmcglashan6274]

a220 not so much but the 321 xlr and the 350 yes

[@alph5230]

@@andrewmcglashan6274 Because Boeing doesn't have ANYTHING to rival the a220 😂😂

[@Chris58851]

@@alph5230 They have something from 60's known as 737-7MAX aka the Frankenliner to rival A220.

[@nntflow7058]

Airbus own 50% of ATR. Which mean that Airbus also got money from ATR42 and ATR72. With Bombardier Q400 out of the picture now. Airbus is squishing Boeing from Top to Bottom.

[@andrewlarson7895]

@@alph5230 that will be changing boeing is in a sweet place right now.

[@vinzchannel01]

WTF is Triple X?? Triple 7x you mean

[@Sacto1654]

I think several airlines are interested in an A350XWBneo that uses essentially a “shrunk down” variant of the GE9X engine. Especially with the 777 replacement cycle now starting very soon.

[@jiajianhou426]

Still haven’t flew on the A350 and I want to so bad!

[@chrismckellar9350]

It is better than the B787.

[@jiajianhou426]

@@chrismckellar9350 I flew on the B787 once and it was better than average. The only A350 flight I see myself getting on is a delta long haul. But delta tickets are hella more expensive than another airline’s b777 flight with the same route.

[@user-yt198]

This video is full of wrong information. Airbus never had an A350Neo plan themselves. Actually GE approached Airbus and offered new engines, but Airbus rejected it as they calculated that the claimed efficiency increase will not worth development costs. Note that the plan is not only re-reengining A350, but it also requires redesign of the wings as in the case of 777X.

[@hodb3906]

Wasn’t the whole redesign of the 777x wing for more efficiency? I doubt the change in engine had anything to do with it.

[@user-yt198]

@@hodb3906 Both wing and new engine are for efficiency.

[@hodb3906]

@@user-yt198 I know. But the engine had nothing to do with the redesign of the wing though.

[@user-yt198]

@@hodb3906 They are connected. GE9X is bigger and more efficient than GE90, but it provides less thrust. You have to provide more lift to compensate thrust loss. This is achieved by larger wings.

[@hodb3906]

@@user-yt198 Well more lift increases drag. Hence the higher AR ratios but lower sweep. However the GE9X doesn’t have less thrust. It has a lower thrust rating. It still has a higher maximum thrust and higher continuous thrust than the GE90.

[@chron123]

"A-Free-Fifty NEO"

[@nicholasmarshall9128]

Depends on how long it will take for customers to receive their full order. IAG signed a massive order for the 737-max because of the production delays and airbus producing less a320s per month than promised. Yes an a350 neo would be the most efficient plane by far, but if you cant get it until long after you could get your full order of 777s (likely at a lower price), is it worth it?

[@stuartd8233]

The A350 is a beautiful comfortable efficient aeroplane, it needs no hype, it sells itself and Airbus need not concern itself too much with Boeing. Boeings biggest problem is not Airbus but itself.!

[@aseem7w9]

Boeing can develop a 787 NG and destroy Airbus too

[@andrewmcglashan6274]

The trent XWB 97's don't need replacing at all maybe only for the -900 with the XWB 87's but the -1000 Is going to be fine for another decade or two!

[@arturkasza3176]

This is a very nice video, with the A350s flying in different formations, and an interesting analysis. Interesting also why the major engine manufacturers run into problems with their super advanced engines. Isn't it all becoming too complicated?

[@rogerrussell9544]

It takes a lot of lead time, what they decide today will be a few years down the road before it's on factory floor. Look at Boeing and the 797, they kept waiting and putting it off until they waited too long not to lose market share.

[@simu31]

Airbus probably will, at some point, announce an A350NEO, but all the talk now is just people who don't know what they're talking about sticking "NEO" on the end of an aircraft type and thinking they're clever. I mean, first flight for the A350 was less than ten years ago, they're definitely *not* going to announce a re-engined version when more than half of deliveries are still outstanding. The next new aircraft Airbus will probably announce is the replacement for the A320 family, but even that is several years away, although design work is (apparently) still ongoing. Don't expect any major aircraft announcements from Airbus until after covid is passed and the aviation industry is back to some semblance of normality. Airbus themselves don't see that happening before 2025, so we've got quite a wait. Oh, and *no* it will NOT be a "Boeing killer." Airbus don't want that, the industry doesn't want that, and the public don't want that.

[@stoje8405]

because if it's a killer which may dominate, there's almost no competition and therefore no new innovations, right?

[@neilpickup237]

To say that there will not be an A350 neo (or whatever they call it by then) is like saying that there is no longer sufficient demand for A350/777 type aircraft (as happened with the A380/747). Unless the demand for this type evaporates, it is just a matter of 'when' rather than 'will' it be produced. Who knows, we might even see a neo2 of the A330! As for the future of the 777x, it should be assured, but in market where composite fuselages seem to be the way to go - at least for new designs such as the A350 and 787, perhaps a re-engine with less extensive changes elsewhere may have been the better option to take. The current schedule is already 4 years behind, and that assumes that closer scrutiny of Boeing doesn't reveal anything requiring a significant change. While not expecting the 777x to fail, I believe that it's future is not as certain as many believe, and even though a significant upgrade, it may not be as successful as Boeing needs it to be.

[@aerohk]

I don't understand why Boeing still bother to stay in business at this point. They should sell the commercial division to Airbus

[@CARBONHAWK1]

Because the 777 787 are currently hits in the industry.

[@stoje8405]

you do know there won't be better, new innovation if there's no competition right? so no, competition is a great thing and all fanboys must realise that.

[@larissaa3465]

A jet that had its first flight in 2013, needing a neo variant?

[@nntflow7058]

The engines would only arrived after 2025. By then A350 would be 12 years of old.

[@tpplatfzft]

A far better aeroplane the A350 is, especially in Economy. 3-3-3 is the King.

[@neilpickup237]

Assuming that an A350 neo is inevitable, just how many more times does the 777x need to be delayed before the A350 neo is announced ahead of the 777x being introduced into service?

[@chrismckellar9350]

Airbus is hoping that Qantas will be the launch customer for the A350-1000 'extended range' for Project Sunrise. Qatar is also on an A350-1000 'extended range'. With regards to a A350neo, there is still plenty of time, as Airbus is looking at 2030. RR and GE and possibility PW should be working on the next generation of GTF engines that can operate on biofuel. if Airbus does release an A350neo it will be fueled by biofuel.

[@TysonIke]

Navgeek Avaition you got a lot wrong about the a330neo. The a330neo was never so posed to get over 500 orders as the plane was built to keep costumers like AirAsiaX and Delta. The a330-800 actually has a longer range than the 787 by the way. The a330neo was also cheap for airbus to build as all of its technology was copied from the a350 and existing a330. The a330neo program only had 2 billion in development costs compared to the 32billion with the 787.

[@richardwilcock2942]

Personally i think engine manufacturers have pushed the technology to the limit. Perhaps it is best that they consolidate for a few years. Airbus could work up the A350neo to have GE or RR engines just in case. After all the A330neo was originally an initial concept to save a developing a new plane, the A350. i suspect Airbus are working on the concept, but will not invest until the market improves.

[@AgeCobra]

No they wouldn't plus Boeing has it Military side.

[@RashadKhanAviation2023]

No A350Neo till the A350 is old. The current A350 is good enough for us for now

[@garyhughes9649]

Must be an old video the Genex GE engine now has most of its engine problems resolved it's a massive and fuel efficient engine new technology there are always some teething problems. There's a fair possibility the triple 7x will be the United Arab Emirates economical replacement to the A380

[@mojamoja3962]

The 7x is replacing Emirate's aging 777 not the A380. Emirates will still be flying the A380 for quite a long time.

[@phillipbranch8291]

So, where was the part in this video about the a350 destroying Boeing?

[@simfly1]

erm, an A350 is pretty much a NEO, and no, it won't destroy boeing. They both will succeed.

[@نادرالیراحمان]

A350neo would have been released as the original A350. As it stands the current Airbus 350 with it's lighter weight and lower price tag (if im not mistaken) mostly outsells the B777x in terms of orders. Neo would have been the launch plane.

[@stoje8405]

isn't that the a330neo you're talking about?

[@نادرالیراحمان]

@@stoje8405 A330neo does not compete against the B777x. It competes against the dreamliner.

[@stoje8405]

@@نادرالیراحمان ah i got mistaken, i thought you were talking the original A350 (which is now the A330neo) yes it is the closest competitor to the 787

[@ryeshelton7953]

what about a 500+ passenger plane with carbon neutral engines that run on 100% SAF..... maybe Airbus A360 or A370.

[@TysonIke]

I think that now is the perfect time to announce an a350neo. It could be the end of the 777x. I don’t think that an a350 neo would do much to the 787.

[@Tom-js3iz]

Why would you want to end the 777x? You really hate Boeing don’t you?

[@TysonIke]

Zyphox I’m saying that if Airbus announced a a350neo now it could end the 777x. The 777x is actually my favorite Boeing plane but from a financial standpoint announcing an a350neo now would be the best time for Airbus to do it.

[@stoje8405]

@@TysonIke it would be perfect to make A350neo with almost same characteristics as A35K but with range of over 18K KM and better efficiency and no bleed air which would be genius to finally launch SYD-LHR flights😁

[@Lee247Jamaica]

Yeeeet

[@GTPhan]

For some Airbus A3XXNeo, what's Neo stand for ?

[@normaal4663]

NEO .... New Engine Option ... just google for ''Airbus neo''

[@GTPhan]

@@normaal4663 For Boeing, what's MAX stand for? They just change 737MAX to 737Neo , Problem solved.

[@NeonSamurai4381]

The A350neo can wait until 2035 and use Rolls Royce's ultrafan

[@jatxemo6156]

I find a350 noisier than a380 inside but with ultrafan things might change

[@gasviation9077]

a380 is quieter than gliders i can't even hear the engine

[@jarheadcharlie2315]

If the 350 needs a NEO already, Airbus needs to drop RR.

[@steinwaldmadchen]

Unless GE offer sth significantly advance of the game. GE9X is improved but not adequate over Trent XWB, and definitely doesn't put A350NEO ahead of the game. UltraFan-like leap is what Airbus needed, though RR in its current state is questionable.

[@ant2312]

well we aren't putting American engines on them

[@drdoolittle5724]

No need now, 777X is dead and gone now so why do Airbus need to meddle with what is perfection?

[@andrewmcglashan6274]

777x is not dead at all It has been delayed due to rona not cut off

[@aventage8290]

no need to allow competitors to catch up

[@kazedcat]

Ultrafan engine will offer better efficiency.

[@Tom-js3iz]

Lol 777x better than a350

[@andrewmcglashan6274]

@@Tom-js3iz sym a350 is pog

[@jatxemo6156]

Geared turbo fan

[@johniii8147]

The neo isn’t happening anytime soon. RR has put the next gen UltraFan on hold indefinitely until the next new airplane is launched.

[@steinwaldmadchen]

Or the other way round - A350NEO is spectulated as UltraFan's prime application, so if A350NEO halts, so does UltraFan. Boeing simply don't have the capacity to put forward a new aircraft yet, and even if they do, it's more likely a NMA/NSA-sized one and with GE.

[@kazedcat]

@@steinwaldmadchen Airbus will not wait for Boeing. Airbus is also constantly tweaking their planes into better variants. So they will use Rolls Royce's future engine when it is available. The problem is the propose engine need many technological development so it is not even sure if Rolls Royce can implement some of this technology.

[@steinwaldmadchen]

@@kazedcat They don't wait for Boeing, but for market recovery. Everyone in the industry are in survival mode, and long haul travel are expected to recover the last. Even if recovered, the market would be flooded by off-lease 77W or even 787/A350 for a few years. Plus, A321XLR and somehow A220 would take away some midhaul routes, bit by bit, regardless of post COVID19 recovery. So for now, A350NEO is probably the last thing Airbus should care. Some studies are under the water I guess, but likely launch is postponed for good.

[@johniii8147]

@@steinwaldmadchen It’s the other way around actually it’s Rolls-Royce that’s killing off the new year for the moment just like they did with a 380 NE0. They simply don’t have the money to put into it right now an Airbus isn’t going to give them that money. There is no demand right now for a neo right now anyway

[@kazedcat]

@@steinwaldmadchen The engine is not ready this year or in 2025. If the engine becomes ready in 2030 and add 5 years for integration development then A350 NEO is likely to be flying in 2035. That is enough time for the market to normalize and grow again.

[@Speedster___]

Boeing seems to be the leader in long haul by a a slim margin. AB is far and away the leader in SH. Thanks Bombarier! Medium haul as in Tran-con in US it’s a draw IMO.

[@thomascdurham9130]

NO!

[@harryperry5055]

How has this got 756 views?

[@stradivarioushardhiantz5179]

When 777-8 take its first delivery,,,,the Trent-XWB & GEnx unveiled the next-gen 🛫🤓

[@garyhughes9649]

Of course I bring up the A380 and I freely admit I am somewhat biased towards Boeing I'm an American I also freely admit the A380 is a fine jet but it was supposed to blow the 747 out of the sky no pun intended yeah it did not last for 20 years from a financial standpoint it was a disaster on the scale of Krakatoa. We both know there's a lot of ego in the aviation industry and part of the reason the A380 was produced was due to Ego ROM Airbus my biggest question about the whole A380 project was how in the name of all things holy did they're engineers Miss the calculations of the Incredible cost of flying that jet unless it's 99.9%. .9% of the time they had to have known the costs plus it was approximately 30 years later then the 747 which according to Boeing was almost to Big itself. It took near a decade from start to completion to build a 380 the 747 went from paper to production in about 30 months without near the computer power that has been available for the last 20 years. So you are damn right I bring up the A380 it's the white elephant in the room that I guess people don't want to talk but I am mystified by how the engineers got it wrong or what went wrong as I said it's a fine jet it's just too expensive to fly unless it's filled to capacity. I've read estimates as high as Thirty billion dollars that were involved with the R&D and start up production of the A380. I've just never heard a good explanation on how the plane miss the mark. Airbus was planning on selling at least a thousand of the A380 it didn't reach half that doubt they recovered they're huge investment I know everybody's choosing the hub-and-spoke theory didn't pan out Boeing was fortunate or lucky or whatever you want to call it did a lot of research maybe all the above but point-to-point flying became more the norrm. I also admit the 737 Max 8 is pathetic maybe the Band-Aid is good enough to do the job I don't know the 737 predecessors were very efficient and profitable Jets and I would bet money and lots of it that the triple 7X we'll end up doing the job for the United Arab Emirates that the A380 was going to do and still is to an extent it can carry 400-plus passengers and we both know twin jets are the future half the fuel roughly and a half engine maintenance when is pandemic disappears people will start flying again in large numbers.. Airbus builds some excellent Jets I never said they didn't but the A380 was going to be to Airbus what an apple is to apple pie so I will probably keep asking a question it's simple calculations on fuel usage operational costs and obviously they didn't get it right I've read 25000 to $30,000 cost per flight hour on the A380 the triple 7X is about half that and it will make an excellent freighter which is on the uprise and the A380 there again it has lots of volume but it's gross vehicle take off weight is used up by Fuel and the weight of the jet. If I have told any untruth here I apologize I did not intentionally lie about anything and all I did was present a couple facts and a question or two I never get any answer to. I'm not being sarcastic here they 380 is in some very good company the Concord pretty much failed for the same reasons it was very thirsty and required a lot of fuel and maintenance speed is expensive the ssts last crash didn't help things at all either buddy in aviation that has to happen once in awhile. And trust me I'm not the only one bringing up the quick and unfortunate demise of the A380

[@UsmanAli-eh4oi]

A350 & A220, Boeing Killers!!!

[@mmm0404]

0rders 787- 1500 a350 -900 Boeing has not even released the 787F , 787-10ER and 787-9LR which will further destroy airbus in terms of sales

[@CARBONHAWK1]

If they can’t make a freighter then Boeing still lives.

[@kazedcat]

777 freighter conversion is going to kill that market.

[@ant2312]

oh look here is he again with his rubbish

[@chingweixion621]

@@kazedcat very true

[@Tom-js3iz]

Boeing won’t not live lol

[@peterrodriguez6029]

You'll see one A350 in the skies and airports for every 100 B787, hence, you tell me if the A350 will destroy Boeing. There's your answer!!!!

[@normaal4663]

As of May 1 , 2021 there are 351 A350's in service and 1005 787's build ( so less will be in service ) so keep on dreaming with your 1 to 100 .....

[@bd5av8r1]

Like Andrew stated: Boeing is doing a good enough job destroying itself. :D lol

[@RashadKhanAviation2023]

LOL 😂 Boeing: I have to say this, but we are destroyed now. Boeing fans: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Airbus: haha yes die trash

[@ambergris5705]

What Airbus needs to do : First, a longer A220 Then a shortened A350 Then a replacement for the A320 family, but bigger, like the 757, which would slot between the biggest A220 and the smallest A350 At that moment phase out the A330 and A320 neo families, since their duties have been taken over. If this gives a sufficient influx of money, make a longer version of the A350 And Airbus will then have successfully replaced all the planes conceived before 2000 with newer, better and more efficient planes. To which Boeing cannot really answer, since they are still literally trying to get the 777X and the 737 max in the air.

[@adamclabaugh1945]

They just developed the aircraft why would they need new engines already lmaooo

[@spongebubatz]

They probably just add another engine option for customers. I don’t think it’s going to be called A350neo as it’s not more than an A350 with a second engine option just like it’s the case with most aircraft nowadays!

[@steinwaldmadchen]

@@spongebubatz I'm skeptical to this. In fact, A350 is already 10 years since first flight by 2025, by then a refresh would be necessary to remain competitive, both towards 787 or a more hostile environment regarding carbon emission. GE9X is better than XWB or GENx, but inadequate by then. So if GE offer anything, it has to be better.

[@AmritDhillon]

Too early

[@luisk1568]

Def not one of your better titles.

[@Greatdome99]

NO. Airlines as a group buy models from each on purpose to keep them alive and competitive. To have only one source of airplanes would be disasterous. and expensive--and I don't think the USA would tolerate not having a viable airframer in case of war or trade battles.

[@alaa-eldin_hamdan]

Did you hear of Southwest?

[@theflare_9755]

wow, your voice is quite smooth

[@mattevans4377]

Boeing will always be king in the American market, plus it has freight planes.

[@alaa-eldin_hamdan]

King of defective products?

[@mattevans4377]

@@alaa-eldin_hamdan I wasn't praising them, my bad. I more meant American companies will always buy American. Add in the freight market, amd I don't see them going bankrupt.

[@MichaelKing4023]

They do not need help they are doing a great job of doing that on there own. The Disaster that is both the 737 Max and 787 with all it major problems. Who would want anything from Boeing any more.

[@texasabbott]

The A220-500LR with shortfield capability would utterly destroy Boeing.

[@mmm0404]

Lol. By the time the a220-500LR is released , boeing will have already launched A 737 replacement with ultrafan engines . The a220-500 will only destroy the a320

[@Lee247Jamaica]

Even if the a350neo came the 787 would have still been picked

[@ant2312]

no it wouldnt because the A350 is better

[@stoje8405]

the 787 is NOT a direct competition against the A350 because A350 is aimed at 777 instead of 787, that's about the what airline needs, the only thing 787 wins is only at fuel burnt per seat and it's only by less than 5%! the current A350 already outclassed 787 in every way, except very slight fuel burnt per seat difference.

[@Lee247Jamaica]

@@ant2312 nah airlines prefer the 787 900+ have been built while 300 a350s have been built

[@Lee247Jamaica]

@@stoje8405 ok

[@stoje8405]

@@Lee247Jamaica it would make sense if you compare the a330neo with 787 currently because they serve similar markets, and while 787 outperforms A330neo especially long ranges, neo can be efficient on shorter routes, and as a bonus, less additional pilot training, meaning despite the neo is using same fuselage as old A330s instead of new jet like 787/A350, it gives a surprisingly close competition to the 787, also have you heard 787s are going to be built only at South Carolina after this? it's going to be on the decline probably

[@marcoducceschi3849]

Next Airbus 350 will be a 2000 a stretch 1000 to kill off B777x

[@Tom-js3iz]

Yeah, nah

[@stoje8405]

I don't think they need to stretch 1000, cause you know, point to point is more popular

[@stoje8405]

@Vincent Fong i don't think it's needed imo, point to point is more popular so i don't think we'll see spoke&hub aircrafts after the 777-9

[@lucaspereira-drummer2847]

🇧🇷This cannot happen kkkk, both have different demands

[@Dexter037S4]

No, because the USAF exists.

[@kadenwright2051]

No.

[@averagejoe9249]

A350 is getting old and outdated already. Definitely need a neo version

[@ant2312]

you've obvously never flown on one then hence the reason you are talking rubbish

[@garyhughes9649]

G 546 the triple 7X it's going to be around for a long time it is the replacement for the 747 and the A380 in a much more economical version to operate. It's unfortunate for bowling they didn't have it flying 2 years ago like they'd hoped but once the pandemic is cleared off Airlines will be flying it alot on international flights it carries a huge passenger and cargo load and it's fuel efficiency due to the new engine and the extended wings we'll keep it in the air for a long time so few people are flying now compared to the Future I believe the triple 7x is bigger then most existing versions of the a350 and all of it versions.. Air Freight demand is sharply increasing so the triple 7X brighter version of Boeing 747 will be flying a long time just for Freight and passengers with the triple 7X. I suspect in the future Airbus will try and get a bigger piece of the Air Freight Market

[@stoje8405]

what? apparently it's less than a decade! but it would be interesting to see neo version, hopefully can fly SYD-LHR so that maybe VS/BA/QF would order them to do so

[@jlmarc01]

Hahhahahaha, I don’t think so