Taking shape

However, clearly both the 787 and A350 XWB are paradigm shifts in materials, systems and production systems that will form the basis of medium to long haul twin aisle aircraft designs for the next 50 years.

And over the next 20 years alone that market is put at 7330 aircraft worth US$1. 77 trillion, almost as large by value as the 23,370 single aisle aircraft worth US$1. 95 trillion that Boeing forecasts will be ordered. High stakes! Thus the need to get it just right is critical, given the troubled history over the past two decades of designs falling short on both fuel burn and reliability.

In the 250 to 350-seat category, the MD-11 and A340 series have been eclipsed by the 777 as that aircraft emerged as the industry’s most reliable and fuel efficient twin aisle at the longer range end of the market. In the medium range segment the A330 has swept aside the 767 and Boeing’s attempts to update the model.

With the A350 XWB, Airbus has taken the ambitious step of trying to take on both the 787 and the 777, something that some key industry players have questioned. In 2007, now Air Lease Corp chairman and CEO Steven Udvar-Hazy highlighted the challenges in taking on the 777 and 787 with a single platform.

Enhanced performance?

Udvar-Hazy’s caution was played out at the Paris Airshow, with Airbus and Rolls‑Royce moving to improve the performance of the A350-1000, although at an 18 month cost to the EIS which moves to 2017. But the improvements didn’t appear to please its core customers.

At the show Airbus unveiled a modified -1000 model featuring a higher thrust – 97,000lb – variant of the Trent XWB engine being developed by Rolls-Royce that will give the aircraft another 4. 5 tonnes of payload and 400nm of range.

EADS CEO Louis Gallois was quick to put a positive slant on the delay.

“The delays are not caused by bungling or production glitches. The A350 is the best managed program at Airbus by far and the program is under control,” Gallois said.

“This is not about delays but to improvements in the program. ” But the improvements come at a price, says Airbus COO Fabrice Bregier, who said the changes will add an extra $9 million to the A350 XWB’s US$299. 7 million price tag.

Airbus also delayed the EIS of the smaller -800 model by two years because demand has moved to the larger -900, which remains on schedule for 2013, says the company. “The first customers of the A350-800 XWB have decided to migrate to the -900,” Bregier said. “We have listened to the market. ” Thus far, 42 orders have been converted from -800s to -900s. Airbus COO John Leahy insisted that no customers were upset by the changes, but Bregier admitted that discussions with existing airlines on the price hike will be subject to sensitive negotiations.

Leahy said that the manufacturer has had “pretty good” success with A350-900 and -800 orders, but has seen “softness” in -1000 sales.

Orders for the -900, with a 2013 EIS, total 359, while commitments for the -800 number 140. Orders for the -1000 total just 74, and airlines have been asking Airbus to “give us more performance” on the model, according to Leahy.

Whereas the original A350‑1000 XWB fell short of matching the 777-300ER in terms of performance, the new version will “surpass” the Boeing aircraft, Leahy stated.

But while he insisted that customers were happy about the changes, clearly two are not.

Emirates president Tim Clark told Australian Aviation that according to his airline’s calculations, the -1000 needs a 105,000lb thrust engine to leapfrog the 777-300ER, which would mean a new fan and significant modifications.

Clark is also leery on the weight of the -1000 and is not prepared to make a commitment until there is more clarity. “There is going to be more modifications and they add weight. ” “The jury is out,” warns Clark. “And we were not consulted on this final configuration. ” Clark says that the airline never intended to put the -1000 on its longest haul routes, and it wants the original configuration and timeline.

Qatar Airways’ outspoken CEO Akbar Al Baker was more critical about the changes in an interview with Flight International, but has different demands of the aircraft.

“I was expecting that Airbus would make a competitor to the 777-300ER, that we would have considerably lower seat-mile costs and at least 15 per cent more range, but that is not going to happen,” Al Baker told Flight.

“What they are going to give us is fewer seats than the 777-300ER and marginally more range.

“Why should I go for a new aircraft while I already have one that has more revenue generation and just a little less range? I am investing in this aircraft with very little marginal benefit, range-wise, and negative benefit capacity-wise. ” Al Baker is also concerned about the reduction in commonality of the new variant.

“Airbus is not listening to us – I don’t think they have achieved anything with this investment. ” Al Baker also warned that if Boeing can achieve a five per cent reduction in specific fuel consumption as part of the 777-300ER improvement package, “that alone will defeat the -1000 program. ” Clark says GE can achieve that with improvements to the GE90 that harness technologies from the GEnx and LEAP programs.

“What is Boeing waiting for?” asks Clark.

Boeing Commercial Airplanes president Jim Albaugh told Australian Aviation that the company will have an answer on the 777.

“Whether that is incremental improvements or a significant derivative remains to be seen,” Albaugh said. “We’ll take whatever action we need to take on the 777 to make sure that we maintain the 777’s advantage. ” A significant amount of the debate on the A350’s stated advantage over the 777‑300ER relates to the age-old seat count differences between the arch rivals.

In the Emirates three class configuration the A350-1000 XWB was to seat 317 passengers, whereas the 777-300ER seats 355, a difference of 38, but the Airbus count puts the difference at just 15.

Helping to confuse the numbers, Emirates is drawing up a new configuration plan for the A350-1000 XWB taking advantage of new and more compact galley technology, which lifts the seat count to 340.

However, Clark points out that he believes he may be able to add two seat rows – 20 seats – to the 777-300ER using the same galleys, which would maintain or possibly extend that advantage.

Regardless, the A350-1000 XWB is now more capable with 400nm more range.

“That’s an extra hour of flying,” notes Leahy.

Airbus EVP A350 XWB program Didier Evrard told media at the Paris Airshow: “We have more time to optimise the [-1000] and the market can wait a little bit for this enhanced aircraft. ” He noted that Airbus expects the A350-1000 XWB’s first flight to take place in 2016.

Rolls said the Trent XWB’s 97,000lb maximum thrust “will be achieved by the inclusion of new high temperature turbine technology, increasing the size of the engine core and advanced fan aerodynamics. ” Importantly, the engine’s fan size will not change, meaning Airbus won’t have to make significant fuselage modifications.

Airbus head of A350 XWB marketing Sophie Pendaries explained that the company had been extremely careful in what it was trying to achieve with the -1000.

Production

Meanwhile, Evrard said the manufacturer is “heading toward the final assembly line by the end of 2011” for the static test A350-900 XWB.

While Airbus has pushed out EIS of the -1000 and the -800 by up to two years, doubts linger about the -900 timeline.

In August last year, New York based Bernstein Research forecast that A350 XWB deliveries would slip into 2014 and only eight would be delivered that year, flagging a significant slippage in the program.

Pendaries assured Australian Aviation that the program is on time for EIS in 2013.

“The first flight will be at the end of 2012 with a one year certification,” Pendaries said.

She insisted that Airbus has learnt from the A380 and 787 design and production issues. “We were still in the design phases when the 787 issues were surfacing and we were able to make design changes to the A350,” she says.

Clark, however, is leery, telling Australian Aviation that the airline has moved its -900 EIS to 2015.

Still, Airbus has been frank on the production and certification issues for the A350 XWB program. At Paris, Evrard termed it “very challenging. ” Bregier outlined the risks at an investor and analyst breakfast at the show. These included: Supply chain readiness for detailed parts (clips, brackets, tubes and pipes); learning of production support teams; travelled work from components to pre-final asembly line and FAL (final assembly line); preparation of the ramp-up; design cleaning and maturity; manufacturing processes capability; supply chain performance; resources; and test results involving changes.

Bregier added that while risks are being mitigated at each maturity gate and through the ‘alert and fix’ principle, there is no room in the planning for significant problems. In fact, the A350 XWB’s flight test program has been compressed from the original 15 to 12 months, making system maturity critical.

However, good progress is being made, says Airbus.

All the main challenges related to new technology have been demonstrated in full scale, and critical design reviews for systems and airframe components have been successfully closed together with partners.

According to Evrard there is a “high design maturity before the start of the assembly phase”, while cabin definition and overall aircraft configuration for the first two customer aircraft have been frozen.

Importantly, functional integration tests at Airbus and systems suppliers are now in operational mode, more than one year before the first flight.

At Rolls-Royce, engine testing is progressing well and the engine for the A380 testbed is under acceptance at the engine maker.

Airbus’s risk mitigation philosophy on the A350 is to split the make and buy equation 50:50, with critical components kept within the company.

The large risk sharing aerostructure partners are Spirit in Kinston, North Carolina, Aerolia in Meaulte, France, GKN Aerospace at Filton in the UK, and Premium Aerotec in Nordenham, Germany. In all, there are 55 suppliers and 125 work packages.

In the third quarter, work on major component assemblies will commence at a series of Airbus facilities across Europe.

Broughton in the UK is the site for wing box assembly, while the aft fuselage and vertical tailplane will be built up at Hamburg. The A350 XWB nose, front and centre fuselage will come together at St Nazaire in France, and Getafe Spain is the site for the horizontal tail construction.

The pylon and nacelle are being built in Toulouse, the site of the FAL.

Systems installation at the pre-FALs is due to start in the fourth quarter.

In December Airbus started making the first carbon fibre barrel for the A350 XWB fuselage at the company’s production plant in Illescas, Spain. Most of the A350 XWB fuselage is made from long carbon fibre panels, which Airbus maintains are easier to manufacture and assemble than barrel sections (as used on the 787). However, for the rear part of the fuselage, which is tapered, Airbus selected a barrel as the optimum structure.

By May, every structure supplier to the program had successfully produced carbon fibre components.

Virtual flights

Airbus commenced virtual flights in a dedicated A350 XWB ‘iron bird’ rig located in Toulouse in May. The mechanical structure will be home to months of electrical, hydraulic and flight-control systems integration testing. At the same time, Airbus also commenced testing of the A350 XWB’s high lift system at a full scale test rig in Bremen.

The aircraft’s cabin systems are also being tested in a unique test rig which features waste, water, communications and air supply, which can be tested in a stand-alone or integrated environments.

Another rig in Filton is now testing the aircraft’s nose gear and main landing gear units, which are built by Liebherr Aerospace and Messier-Dowty respectively.

At Paris, Airbus executives were upbeat on position of the program.

Bregier said that “new CFRP technology is ready for manufacturing, and systems maturity was developing well with major integration test benches already in service. ” He added that the first large parts were manufactured, and the focus was moving to pre-FAL start for component assembly and then systems installation.

But he also conceded that “challenges remain” to reach the start of FAL at year end with an appropriate level of quality to enable the ramp up. However, he was bullish that risks are being managed through lessons learned from previous programs.

More bearish is Bernstein Research, which says in a special July 1 EADS report that while the A350 XWB “can become a dominant large widebody program, risks remain high. ” Bernstein said that while the increase in performance of the -1000 was positive, it was disappointed that there was no change to the seat count. It noted Qatar’s disappointment.

“The other question on this program is how challenging will it be to take the engine thrust up and ensure the airframe is adequate for the A350-1000 XWB?” Bernstein said that it believed it would be adequate, based on the size of the wing, although it says many are skeptical.

“We know that Airbus has had to make modifications to increase the size of the trailing edge of the A350-1000 XWB already,” Bernstein said.

“Still if the A350-1000 can perform as promised, it should be a very successful aircraft. ” Bernstein, however, is doubtful on “the heavy” A350-800 XWB, saying the aircraft may be scrapped, which it would “view positively”.

“We see significant risk on the A350 XWB program as there has been on nearly every commercial program in the last 10 years. This is a difficult program as management has acknowledged,” warns Bernstein.

But, like the 787, the A350 XWB holds great promise and fascination of how yet another titanic aircraft sales and production struggle will play out.