The war of words is heating up between Airbus and Boeing over the US manufacturer's 7E7 challenge to the A330's mid-market supremacy
Airbus wrong-footed Boeing by creating an all-new, ultra-large airliner - the A380 - which will be difficult for a 747-based derivative to compete with. Now, for the first time in recent years, the European manufacturer is getting a taste of its own medicine with the US company's launch of its 7E7 programme.
This all-new twinjet family, similarly priced to the Boeing 767-300ER, is aimed squarely at the "mid-market" segment where the A330 has been having so much recent success, after Boeing recognised it could wring no more out of its 767 models. Indeed, the arrival into service of the A330-200 in 1998 was the blow that knocked out the 767-300ER, effectively rendering a hitherto big seller uncompetitive and obsolete (as a new product) overnight. It was Boeing's campaign defeats when pitching the 767 against the A330 that led to the development of the 7E7 via an 18-month diversion on the Sonic Cruiser project.
Airbus was created in 1970 with the purpose of bringing into production the world's first 250-seat twinjet - the size category the Boeing 7E7 is aimed at. Airbus's first design, the A300, was developed to meet the demand 30 years ago for a high-capacity, short-haul people mover to operate key city connections in Europe such as London to Manchester or Paris, and the latest variant, the A300-600R, continues to serve this sector well.
A market still exists for such an aircraft - particularly in Asia and the USA - and Boeing has included it within the catchment area for the 7E7's design parameters. But as the inventor of the widebody twinjet, Airbus believes it has a fairly good understanding of that market segment, and is convinced that it is impossible to cover efficiently both short- and long-haul roles in this size category with one aircraft.
Design parameters
Boeing is developing a two-fuselage-length, three-model 7E7 family to tackle the 200- to 300-seat size category in both the short- and long-haul markets, where previously it competed with the 757 and 767. Scheduled for service entry in 2008, the long-range, 220-seat 7E7-8 is the baseline model from which the short-haul -3 is being developed. This will feature a modified structure and a shorter-span wing to optimise it for short sector lengths. The 7E7-9 stretch will follow about two years later, providing similar performance to the -8, but with about 20% more seats (see table).
The 7E7 incorporates some major innovations to reduce its operating costs, including new-generation bleedless engines from General Electric and Rolls-Royce, new advanced, simplified systems and a step change in the level of composites employed in its construction. Boeing says that over 50% of the 7E7 - including the airframe - will be made of composites, compared with just 9% on its most recent new design, the 777. These changes will enable the aircraft to use "20% less fuel than any other aircraft of its size", says Boeing. The advances in engine technology alone will contribute as much as 8% of the increased efficiency, it adds.
So what is the inventor of the widebody twinjet going to do about the 7E7? The official answer is nothing - for the moment. But while Airbus is publicly stating its confidence that the A330's performance and operating costs will keep it within shouting distance of the long-haul 7E7 derivative, plans are already afoot for a response from Toulouse.
The A330 is well established, with more than 290 aircraft in service (150 A330-200s and 140 A330-300s), and Airbus chief commercial officer John Leahy describes the new Boeing model as a "reinvention" of the Airbus twinjet, while the European manufacturer's president and chief executive Noel Forgeard dismisses it as a "flattering imitation". He says the 7E7 is "sporting great direct operating costs that are in fact virtually identical to those of our own A330 on a seat-mile basis".
Forgeard is also circumspect about Boeing's claimed technology gains. "With just 18 months between [the delivery of the A380 and 7E7], how should there be considerable advances in composites, systems and structure?" he says. "I can assure you that any aircraft delivered in such a short time after the A380 will have identical technology, in systems design and manufacture."
Leahy says that "except for the engines, the 7E7 is virtually the same aircraft" as the A330. He says that "one of the 7E7's Achilles' heels" is that the baseline aircraft - which has 10-15% less capacity than the A330-200 - is "too small".
This size difference enables Airbus to mitigate Boeing's claimed 20% lower fuel consumption for the 7E7. Leahy says given that fuel represents about 30% of total cash operating costs (COC) and that, as the A330-200 is a larger aircraft, the 7E7-8 only has a 4% advantage (in fuel costs) over the Airbus on a COC per seat basis. Overall, Airbus calculates that the smaller 7E7-8 will actually have a COC per seat 2.5% greater than the A330-200 when flightcrew, maintenance and navigation costs are included. "At best, you see equal seat-mile costs," says Leahy.
He concedes that if an airline wants "7,000-8,000nm [13,000-14,800km] range", then the 7E7's longer legs give it an advantage, but Leahy sees this requirement as niche because "99% of the market is for 6,000nm" - well within the A330-200's abilities. But he does not expect the 7E7's much-vaunted brand-awareness-driven exterior shape to win it any extra orders. "Not once did an airline say to me: 'We'd buy your aircraft if it looked better'," says Leahy.
As the established technology leader in civil aircraft design with its development of digital fly-by-wire, envelope protection and use of composites, Airbus is clearly aggrieved about suggestions that Boeing has leap-frogged it with the 7E7.
Composite benefits
Airbus was the first manufacturer to use composite material in secondary and primary structures, and has adopted it for almost a quarter of the A380's structure. "Composites are applied where they add major benefits and present no risk," says Forgeard. Airbus has made it clear it believes in the evolutionary route to increased use of composites, rather than the revolutionary jump taken by Boeing on the 7E7 to an all-composite fuselage structure.
While Airbus appears outwardly unperturbed by the 7E7, privately it will surely have been concerned at how well the new Boeing has been received by the market, with airlines worldwide seriously evaluating the twinjet for their future needs. The problem Airbus faces is that it has its hands full with the development of the A380 and A400M military transport in the short term, coupled with the fact that the A330 design is still relatively young and is not ready to be replaced by a new design.
However, Flight International has learned that Airbus is studying a longer-range, increased-efficiency, lower-empty-weight A330 potentially powered by derivatives of the engines being developed for the 7E7.
Airbus, which says it has "no comment on possible A330 versions that might emerge in the future", is thought to be aiming at reducing the operating empty weight of the A330-200/300 by at least 3t, while increasing maximum take-off weight from the current 233t to around 240t. All three engine manufacturers are known to have held talks with Airbus about possible new A330 derivatives.
Weight-reduction options under study include a carbonfibre-reinforced plastic (CFRP) centre wing box, plus a variety of possible A340-500/600-based features including CFRP keel beams, rear pressure bulkhead, and monolithic CFRP elevators.
The manufacturer has already had a stab at developing another A330 derivative - the stillborn 220-seat A330-500 of 2000 - which was similar in size to what is now the 7E7-8 and aimed at short- and long- haul markets. This simple shrink of the A330-200 was dropped after Airbus failed to convince the market of its benefits.
An interim solution could be the proposed A330-200 Lite, which although structurally similar to the standard aircraft, would be certificated at lower weights and use derated engines. This aircraft has been offered to Singapore Airlines in a head-to-head flight against the 7E7 to meet the airline's need for a regional widebody to fly routes it used to serve with its A310s. However, Airbus's long-term view is that the short-haul, high-density market will require an all-new aircraft that is fundamentally different in concept to the long-haul design.
Regional study
Leahy revealed last year that Airbus is studying an all-new "regional people-mover optimised for stage lengths of 1,000nm" to compete in the high-capacity, short-haul market, under the project name "A30X". He believes that Boeing's plan to compete in short-range markets with a cropped-wing version of the 7E7 is fundamentally flawed. "It is hard to come up with something that can offer 10% cost savings on short stage lengths," he says. However, technologies emerging by the end of the decade will enable the A30X to offer such an advance when it enters service in around 2014-15, he adds. So plans are afoot in Toulouse to respond to the 7E7, but potential customers may have to be patient.
MAX KINGSLEY-JONES / TOULOUSE
Source: Flight International
