How Boeing FORCED Airbus To Build The A350. A Plane Airbus Never Really Wanted To Build!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 22 май 2024
- Believe it or not, Airbus really didn't want to make a brand new plane in answer to Boeing's revolutionary, groundbreaking carbon composite 787 Dreamliner. Much like Boeing with the Max, Airbus was caught off guard by the enormous success of the 787 and Airbus was simply going to dress up the A330 instead. However, Airbus quickly found out nobody wanted an A330 with a facelift and they were forced to make some big changes because everybody wanted the Dreamliner and nobody was interested in an old Airbus with lipstick. Now watch "The rest of the story."
#Boeing #Airbus #A350 #787 #Dreamliner #carbonfiber #Carboncomposite #japanairlines #JAL516
patreon.com/maximusaviation74...
Support The Channel Buy Me A Coffee
www.buymeacoffee.com/maximusa...
Chapters:
0:00 - Intro
0:48 - Why The JAL 516 Crash Is Important To This Story
1:55 - Evacuation Misinformation
3:35 - Airbus Was The First Total Composite Hull Loss In History
5:15 - How The Boeing 787 Changed Commercial Aviation
6:00 - It All Began With The Boeing Sonic Cruiser
6:38 - The Dreamliner Is Conceived
7:00 - A PLASTIC PLANE? Nobody Will Fly That
6:54 - Airbus NEVER Wanted The A350 Especially A Plastic Version
9:25 - Just Some Lipstick And A Facelift For The A330
10:05 - Aitbusses BIGGEST Customers Prefer The 787 Airbus Is In Trouble
10:42 -The A350 Just A "Bandaid Reaction" To Boeings Dreamliner
11:17 - 787 Orders POUR In. Airbus MUST Rethink The A350
11:42 - Aibus Admits Defeat Also Admits Boeing Was Right
12:12 - Airbus Improved On Boeings Design Afterall
13:10 - "And Know You Know The Rest Of The Story"
Maximus Merch
Hats, Mugs, Hoodies, and T-shirts
teespring.com/stores/maximus-...
Premium Polo Shirts, Mugs, Phone Cases, and more
shop.spreadshirt.com/maximus-...
For Business Inquiries Email: aviationmaximus@gmail.com
Copyright Disclaimer. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statutes that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
Not a single mention the A380 was about 20-25% composite fuselage in the form of Glass Reinforced Aluminium
And landingbay doors, and ruder surfaces, and cargodoors.. and probobly some more
You nailed it, the Japanese people actually follow rules and did as they were told, saving lives. Americans would have ignored every rule and died grabbing all their stuff! I am a proud American and am sad our society has eroded so badly 😢🇺🇸
That's not an erosion. The US people were nurtured with entitlement right from the beginning of their life and media is going crazy about it without reflecting what it leads to.
-A- me -rica- first!
Guess why it's so successful.
But the Japanese way has its downsides too, seeing people working themselves to death.
As such, no society is perfect.
😉
That works both ways. The evacuation took 18 minutes,mainly because the intercom was broken and the cabin crew wouldn’t open the emergency exits until the flight crew told them to.
Watch super jet crash,where Russians were taking suitcases with them down the slides and half the passengers died
That is the least of our problems.
That is not really true. There was a similar accident 20 years ago in the US, and the plane was actually evacuated with in the 90 seconds.
Boeing doesn't deserves credit for anything regarding JL516.
Airbus, the disciplined Japanese people and the professionals at Japan Airlines that do. The thing with composites is that Airbus was *long* toying with it before Boeing even considered using it for the 787, the rear section of the A300 all the way back in 1970 was made with composites, and that was kept with the A330 and A340 when they reused the same fuselage, not to mention 25% of the A380 is made from composites.
The A350 XWB didn't happened "because the 787 exists", it happened because airlines wanted Airbus to design a 777 replacement and that's what they did, it's the customer who says what they will be doing next, not Boeing. Ultimately the "old Airbus with lipstick" did also happen with the A330neo and, by the looks of it, it's not as unwanted as it was assumed.
And I'm not even getting on politics because a lot of the 787's "success" comes from price dumping practices (the Hawaiian 787 order is a well documented example of this), not that it isn't a great plane, but a lot of this "success" comes from business practices because Boeing needs to build a ridiculous amount of these planes to break even given how it sunk the company in debit. Airbus had similar issue with the A380's commercial failure, but at least they had the immense profits from the A330, the A350 and specially the A320 family to make up for that.
Maybe we should be giving credit for these lives being saved to the A350 engineers and not a company that, if anything, is morally fine with killing people for their profits.
A330 just had new orders for 23 more aircraft.
Who hurt you? 😅
Now if only Boeing had applied the clean-sheet-design mentality to the 737 to compete with Airbus too...
and if airbus went clean sheet after a320ceo
@nickolliver3021 The A320ceo is a clean sheet design, and a revolutionary one compared to the contemporary aircraft.
@@todortodorov6056 The 737 was a clean sheet and revolutionary as well!
@@nickolliver3021Yes, it may have been. My comment was intended to correct your mistake about the Airbus 320 ceo, which was a clean sheet design.
@@todortodorov6056 The a320ceo was upgraded to the neo which is not a clean sheet design so it wasn't a mistake from me
5:20 Before the 787, Airbus A380 already made use of Carbon Composite material, not extensively as the 787 or A350, but still a considerably amount considering it size (about 20% of its structure). In fact, Airbus was the first manufacturer on commercial aviation to make use of composite lighter materials, starting with the tail of the A300 some decades ago.
EDIT: So, Boeing wasn't the one giving birth to a new generation of aircraft.
I think Tupolev was using it even before.
The Airbus A300 is a wide-body medium-to-long range airliner; it has the distinction of being the first twin-engine wide-body aircraft in the world.[8][9]: 34 [12]: 57, 60 [19] In 1977, the A300 became the first Extended Range Twin Operations (ETOPS)-compliant aircraft, due to its high performance and safety standards.[6]: 40 Another world-first of the A300 is the use of composite materials on a commercial aircraft, which were used on both secondary and later primary airframe structures, decreasing overall weight and improving cost-effectiveness.[19] Other firsts included the pioneering use of centre-of-gravity control, achieved by transferring fuel between various locations across the aircraft, and electrically signalled secondary flight controls.[20]
GREAT video. Still not sure I am going to get on a Boeing again.
why not
..and Max is giving credit for Boeing, when was Airbus the first using carbon composite material in commercial aviation on the A380.
No worries...you are more likely to die in that Nissan Versa of yours.
As a very frequent flyer, I have instructed my assistant to only book me on Airbus flights. I simply don’t trust Boeing anymore.
Keep the rubber on the runway and the troubles on the ground!! I will see you next time, in the air!! Yeah!!! I love this line!!
It’s good to learn about the fire performance of the carbon fibre. The tape used on the peeling wings and surfaces crumbling gave a bad impression. New materials and designs take a while to inspire confidence
You would be surprised how fire resistant massive wood actually is.
And carbon fibre is not that different.
The problem with wood in the aircraft industry is, it would be to heavy, as it requires a certain thickness to reach fire resistance.
Thank you Maximus - when one company innovates, the other has to follow, and both designs seem to be reliable and safe. Enhanced fire resistance is already saving lives.
Only that it was Airbus the one innovating at least in this specific case of carbon composite materials. ...It seems the A380 has been forgotten.
so with all the experience of the 787, why didn't Boeing build a new 737 based on this experience. Especially as the A350 only appeared as an updated A330 was not something anyone wanted. That's where they need to go.
Because that would have meant certification for the pilots (which the plam buyers have to pay for). No need for extra training was the main selling point of the MAX series
It's known that the reason for MAX is they didn't want to do the R@D knowing what that cost in Time & Money following the 787 pathway.
Especially when the Boeing goal was to increase shareholder satisfaction
So, just a quick cut and paste to create a Max was needed.
But that only reveals that the Management and Board are not in the game to be The Aircraft engineering leaders, that the Boeing team of the past was.
Just executives of a Financial institution that Quality, safety and Engineering excellence is a foreign concept.
That is a good question
Sorry, Maximus, but Airbus is the leader in composite engineering. Boeing as usual follows.
Boeing is the leader in composite engineering
Oh for sure. Boeing is lost. Just remembering the good times.
Maybe Airbus didn’t want to make the A350, but I’m sure they’re happy they did now.
Wow, the Paul Harvey reference sent me back to my childhood while visiting grandparents with the radio in the dining room.
Boeing has followed Airbus lead on Carbon composite materials, since it was Airbus, not Boeing the first using it. This story is upside down.
*Great story!* Thanks Maximus for something uplifting to remember about Boeing! Shout out to their often forgotten engineers!
Awesome video Max - congratulations on your channel so cool!
Wow thank you!!!
If you want to give Boeing some love for decisions they made 20-30 years ago then I’m all with you in that. They did plenty of great stuff back then before they lost their way.
"lost their way"
Interesting aspect about the fire resistance of carbon fiber construction. Looks like it acts much the same as ablative heat shields on spacecraft. With all the bad news about Boeing it is nice to see an innovation by them having a positive impact on the industry.
I quite like the promotional "carbon-fibre livery" on the A350
❤Very well stated and presented. Max Excellent!
Perhaps the most striking contrast of this story is when faced with the same threat from Airbus, a320 neo vs 737, Boeing took the 'easy' way out. They persisted with an obsolete airframe instead of going back to the drawing board for a new one,
Amazing video…. Great info no fluff…
The fierce competition between Boeing and Airbus is instrumental in delivering superior and safer aircraft, along with providing enhanced travel experiences at a more economical price for all of us.
Spot On.
Of course with a Duopoly this was inevitable.
The A350 exists because of Boeing. But it's made of Carbon composite materials not because of Boeing. Airbus already made extensive use of it on the A380 even before the 787
Those who makes these carbon composite materials wants to sell it to everyone and as much as possible.
I love good news in the morning
Thank you
thanks maximus
I'm amazed you didn't pull a muscle with that reach.
I originally thumbs down you but after watching the complete video i undid it. Thank you for your contribution, it was really insightful. Respect for airbus for responding to the needs of the future vs settling or compromising. Boeing could have made the next step forward regarding the 737 Max but chose the later & the rest is history.
See Boeing can build an excellent aircraft as long as they are not allowed to update an older type certificate.
Baloney. Chinook c47 is an example. C135 Stratotanker was updated and still in service. B52 updated and still in service.
@@RLTtizME Wow when the GOV pays the bills BOEING is great but when they need to sell to Southwest......not so much.
@@ImNotPotus Are you posting this while on the job at Sam’s Club? We don’t think you really know anything about this subject. We’ll catch you next time…..flyboy. Lol.
You say test evacuations are unrealistic.
There’s a reason they don’t do them anymore. They used to try to make them as realistic as possible by including old people,restricting people’s movement to simulate handicaps and offering financial rewards for getting out first in order to prevent gentlemanly behaviour.I believe the last test was the MD11 which resulted in numerous broken bones, a quadriplegic and other injuries
Boeing never should’ve stopped building the 777-300ER. Big mistake
Hrrrm wild, i didnt know this, this is the benefit of competition, I guess innovation will stagnate once again when Boeing drops of its perch, I just hope Airbus gets that BWB flying wing out before that happens otherwise we will never see it.
So why has 777X been built with an aluminium fuselage?
Because it’s not a new aircraft. Same reason Airbus didn’t make the A320Neo/A330Neo fuselage made of composites
Very good question....because Boeing considered to save time and money to compete with Airbus...like with the B737 Max....hopefully the B777X will not have the same destiny..
.
@@patrickpeters2903 The reason why the 777x is built out of aluminium is not because of saving time and money to compete with airbus. The 777x wont have the same destiny
@@nickolliver3021 you are so predictable....lol
@@patrickpeters2903 stop twisting facts that are not true
It would be interesting to see how the A220 would fare since that plane also used a new material called Al-Li
Airlines are unloading those as I write this.
7:00 that is not really quite true. There was plenty of carbon composit aircraft that was not military prior to the 787, gliders for example.
You got this all wrong, Airbus used composites in the A300 in the '70s already... Boeing deserves nothing for this incident.
The next generation of nano carbon fiber is also going to be a game changer.
SpaceX famously switched from carbon composites to stainless steel after they had already started building the first prototype Starship. This happened when Elon Musk did some back of the envelope calculations and realized they could more easily build stainless steel Starships for a fraction of the cost and they would be more resilient to temperature extremes to boot. I don’t think aluminum was ever considered due to its notoriously low high-temperature structural instability and melting point. So, my question is, did Boeing (and Airbus) incur additional or save on costs by switching from aluminum to carbon composites? I think we can already infer that it made their planes safer.
Speaking of Paul Harvey, you almost sound like him as well!
Boeing's solution to make planes lighter is to leave out bolts!
Door delete option box all ready ✔️ upon purchase. So to is the pilot error option
Once a jerk...always a jerk.
🤣😂🤣
Maximus is a bit late and a bit early with some of his assumptions. That's not as contradictory as it might seem.
After 7 days after the JAL A350 accident, which killed 5 Japanese crew members of the Dash 7, (which gave the authorities an opportunity to bury them before discussing the fallout from the accident on aircraft design) I, and other YT commentators pointed up apparent news reports that the JAL captain was still walking through the aircraft looking for any stragglers, between 10 and 18 minutes after the exit of passengers, which apparently happened within 90 seconds. As was said at the time, if this information is confirmed by the accident report, then carbon fibre (yes, I know there are other elements as well) structure is going to be seen as mega successful in its role of fire prevention, and the A350 especially, seen as the 'safety poster boy'. I don't remember Maximum stating all this at the time. Its too late now, its already been done.
The B787 is constructed differently, and unless they set fire to one, we don't know if it would behave the same as the JAL 350. However, I understand some B787s have been retired, so if Boeing had the intelligence or even cared, they might buy up and set fire to one of those old hulls, and we'd see.
Maximus is a bit early with his assumptions also, because, we are now waiting for the delivery of the accident report, to confirm many of the rumours we've been hearing and talking about iro the JAL accident. He certainly seems to be lacking in original thought with this video..........
So, according to Maximus, Airbus copied Boeing, and did it right by improving / replacing their original design to avoid getting left behind.
Meanwhile Boeing tried to copy Airbus buy sticking new engines on their ancient single aisle aircraft, and screwed it up and killed a few hundred people.
Yep the comparison is stark. We should be watching a followup video about how Boeing was similarly forced to the build the 797 and now Airbus is deep in the red because nobody will buy their last-generation, relatively inefficient a320. But alas history did not play out like that.
he is not talking about a320neo and 737max. he is talking 787 and a350
@@nickolliver3021 yep - but when both manufacturers faced having to compete with a next gen plane, Airbus bit the bullet and did a clean(er) sheet design but Boeing went with the cheap option and now >300 people are dead. Imagine a different world where the 797 was flying now instead, and Boeing completely owned that segment of the market.
@@mrgilbe1 Not really. Airb7s didn't go clean sheet from a320ceo to neo did they. Why does it matter that 300 people are dead. The 797 being around won't make them own the market share
How many years (pressure cycles) are these composite airframes designed to last and how long after that period can they remain safe to use? Current evaluation methods to detect structural defects appear to rely more on hope than hard fact. I ask because I can't name any transportation industry that doesn't have a deferred maintenance backlog on infrastructure that gets pushed well past it's designed lifespan before replacement, as is tradition.
✈️
Could you say that Boeing blew the doors off AirBus? Wait thats the other way around
It’s ironic that it was the composite construction of the A350 that caused all the problems and disputes between Airbus and Qatar Airways due to surface failures in the extreme conditions of the Middle East…..
What is really funny is that only Qatar has this problem….
Looks like Airbus was successful in building a plane they first din't want to build, the A350. Not so Boeing, they didn't want to build the MAX, build it anyways and screwed up big time
This guy trying to save boeing by sugar coating boeing 😂
Apparently you found that funny. We'll still try to figure that out.
This sad incident just reveals: that 90 seconds evacuation was not achieved in real life. That The miracle that it was a carbon fiber barrel not a Aluminum composite barrel aircraft involved, lives were preserved.
All involved in aviation needs to learn from this lesson that even with a complaint group of Passengers we couldn't achieve the 90 seconds that FAA and others aimed for in a evacuation. So, globally only a few of the carbon fiber aircraft make up our fleets.
But Boeing continues to roll out the MAX solution instead a safer option
Nice informative, video👍
But it definitely sounds like sucking up to the Boeing fans after all the bashings you've given them since 737 max
As far as I'm concerned, Boeing's biggest enemy is Boeing's own management. A sentiment, it seems, shared by many of the employees!
Boeing will make an historic comeback when they get the 757X built and deified. What is the 757X you ask? Well, it is simple, it's a single isle 787. As they did to the 767 to create the 757 so should they do to the 787 to create the new 757X. It is a no brainer.
It wouldn’t be a 757X. The 757 program ended in 2004. You can’t just restart it again after an “hiatus” and just add bigger engines. And even if they created a single aisle 787 it would have to be certified as an all new aircraft anyway
@@tomstravels520 Oh no, it is in fact the 757X and is indeed a clean(ish) sheet design. The original 757 would be extremely difficult, although not impossible, to start building again, but we all know that won't happen. My 757X design calls for a down sizing of the 787 fuselage to a single isle, much like they did with the 767. One would not be wrong to say the 787 is a 767 replacemeant for the 21st century. I just applied the 767/757 paradigm to the 787 and designed a 757X. Carbon fuselage, same wings, (scaled), GEnx, like type rating, etc. I think it would closely match the appearance of the original 757 also and have a lot of synergy with that program. They know how to wind carbon so, while it would be a design challenge, that's what Boeing does. Maybe they could bring some military division folks into help speed up the process. Probably far too much to expect, but it would be nice if they would pull things back in-house and get back on the vertical integration bandwagon. All hail the 757X!!
@@tra757200 Boeing has too many problems to think about a new plane right now. They can’t even get 3 modified planes certified and a space vehicle work properly
It is a no brainer. And that’s why Boeing won’t do it! Real plane guys no longer exist at Boeing.
AIRBUS WON
How much are they paying you to say something nice?
That would be ok if the merit was due. But it isn't. Airbus were the first deciding and using Carbon composite materials on commercial aviation on the A380, not Boeing with the 787. Boeing was just the first making an entire aircraft out of it (EDIT: well, 50% of it to be more precise).
Boeing is technologically playing catch up since the late 80s. ...it seems most of the world hasn't realized it yet.
@@miks564 Airbus used it much earlier in the A300.
Max is probably trolling that stupid prikolliver account that pollutes every aviation channel with meaningless propaganda whenever Boeing or the Frankenmax is mentioned.
In that regard Maximus has been successful as the janitor is all over this thread as usual.
@@kw8757 Yes! In the 70s! But with the A300 they’ve used a fiber glass composite. And they’ve been using light composite materials in all the families of aircraft since then. However, carbon composite I believe the A380 was the first.
@@miks564 Thanks👍
Máx..not buying this one. Plastic jets, plastic parts look great, act great until they explode apart. Hard to believe the resin in carbine fiber isn't highly flammable. Most professional airline wrenches cringe when there is delamination,,say a small bird strike. When built.. conditions have to be perfect. Temperature, humidity, vacuum pulled, drying etc. These conditions can't be done on basic repairs
Techs are more prepared than they used to. It’s not like these A&Ps are working on F 35s or F22s. Guys now know how to mangle these materials. No one said the resins are not flammable but what’s Important here is that the materials burns SLOWER than some aluminum alloys. When you’re getting off a burning airplane that’s important
I guess many years of 787 and a350 service are proving the material (though I have no idea about the maintenance overhead that's keeping them flying safely).
I'm fascinated to know how that Ethiopian 787 that was repaired after an electrical fire at the back of the aircraft is performing. That was another key test of the technology - how do you repair major damage, but that's short of a hull loss, in a carbon fibre fuselage?
@@jimsteinway695 "Guys know how to mangle these materials"....they certainly do at Boeing.🤣
Lmao airbus fan boys are so mad rn HAHA 😂
Eh, what ever makes you believe in Boeing..
Isn’t Airbus always following Boeing? 747 / A380 787/ A350 etc? I do hope we can get back to the glory days of good production and quality products
They are making competing aircrafts, but Boeing is lagging A220 and is planning to lag more in the future. Airbus is soon 2x Boeing.
5 minutes in and still no mention of the subject