Good article about the A350 F, however your comment about the strengthened floor beams allowing the loadmaster to disregard or ignor the placement of cargo pallets in the aircraft during the loading process, by weight into the aircraft is wholely incorrect ALL CARGO BEING LOADED MUST BE WEIGHED AND THD LOADED, EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED IN THE AIC RAFT INACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLISHED WEIGHT AND BALANCE ENVELOP AS DICTATED BY THE AIRBUS LOADING MANUAL.😅 All aircraft are subject to weight and balance, it is a constant in the airline industry, and the A350 F will be no exception
Airbus had updated the A350F payload from 109 to 111 metric tons already a while ago. I am sure everybody was shocked when the old number appeared in the video.
I think the name of the game is the OEW benchmark and how that affects the operating economics of the A350F (132 Ton.) when compared to the B777X freighter (180 Ton.) or even older models still in operation like the MD11 or the 747 freighter variants.
@google if you think showing me the same ad every 30 seconds will make me but the product you are wrong. It will make me boycott them for a lifetime. If I've skipped the ad I am NOT interested.
I too shake my head regarding that bombastic language. Why don't those authors not simply say "everybody was impressed"? That would be still an allegation, much sound much less unhinged.
It's not completely correct. The 787 was a shock for Airbus and the discussion was about Hub-System with A380 or 787 direct flight system. Here Boing was right. Airbus had spend much money on the A380 and the A350 should be an A330 variant, which was not accepted by the customers. So they started the A350 development. Also not the Section composite version of Boeing was choosen but a panel system, because of tooling costs & risks. This had influence on the later 1000 version and new versions with more seats. The Freighter version is developed because of customer demand.
Freighter versions of (primary PAX aircraft) are ROUTINELY ENVISIONED in order to reach out to an additional market and thus increase the numbers sold, built and payed for, with a limited incremental investment. THEN they are developed using detailed specifications which themselves were created to cover the demands of potential customers.
Rolls Royce !?? Really! Bribery involved perchance ?? That's astounding given that RR engines intended for the A380 proved to not even come close to their claimed specs . Increasing A380' running costs to the point of being uncompetetive. Emirates (the largest A380 users) are replacing those CRAP RR engines for a significant A380 perf /running costs upgrade.
Good article about the A350 F, however your comment about the strengthened floor beams allowing the loadmaster to disregard or ignor the placement of cargo pallets in the aircraft during the loading process, by weight into the aircraft is wholely incorrect
ALL CARGO BEING LOADED MUST BE WEIGHED AND THD LOADED, EQUALLY DISTRIBUTED IN THE AIC RAFT INACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLISHED WEIGHT AND BALANCE ENVELOP AS DICTATED BY THE AIRBUS LOADING MANUAL.😅
All aircraft are subject to weight and balance, it is a constant in the airline industry, and the A350 F will be no exception
Airbus had updated the A350F payload from 109 to 111 metric tons already a while ago. I am sure everybody was shocked when the old number appeared in the video.
I think the name of the game is the OEW benchmark and how that affects the operating economics of the A350F (132 Ton.) when compared to the B777X freighter (180 Ton.) or even older models still in operation like the MD11 or the 747 freighter variants.
You forgot the biggest loading door in the industry
@google if you think showing me the same ad every 30 seconds will make me but the product you are wrong. It will make me boycott them for a lifetime. If I've skipped the ad I am NOT interested.
It is important that everybody is shocked. How he is shocked is not so important! 🤣
I too shake my head regarding that bombastic language. Why don't those authors not simply say "everybody was impressed"? That would be still an allegation, much sound much less unhinged.
It's good that European aircraft don't fall out of the sky like US aircraft
It's not completely correct. The 787 was a shock for Airbus and the discussion was about Hub-System with A380 or 787 direct flight system. Here Boing was right. Airbus had spend much money on the A380 and the A350 should be an A330 variant, which was not accepted by the customers. So they started the A350 development. Also not the Section composite version of Boeing was choosen but a panel system, because of tooling costs & risks. This had influence on the later 1000 version and new versions with more seats. The Freighter version is developed because of customer demand.
Freighter versions of (primary PAX aircraft) are ROUTINELY ENVISIONED in order to reach out to an additional market and thus increase the numbers sold, built and payed for, with a limited incremental investment.
THEN they are developed using detailed specifications which themselves were created to cover the demands of potential customers.
Much of the video content bears no relationship to the narrative.
It is always just eye candy for the viewer while the robot voice stumbles along....
This will go like most of Airbus’s offerings which is overpromise and undeliver.
Rolls Royce !?? Really! Bribery involved perchance ??
That's astounding given that RR engines intended for the A380 proved to not even come close to their claimed specs . Increasing A380' running costs to the point of being uncompetetive. Emirates (the largest A380 users) are replacing those CRAP RR engines for a significant A380 perf /running costs upgrade.
nice go touch grass
Boeing is freight king screw Europe we got all asia and africa. Screw french and engish royal rolls engines suck.