How capable is the A350-900?

[MoKa777]

Hi everyone!

I have a question about the A350-900.

How capable is it?

I really feel it is capable of a lot but am unable to quantify it. I have heard that it will have amazing take-off performance and be able to lift quite a bit.

In a real world setting, with high temperatures, winds, etc., what can the A350-900 do?

Once 2020 rolls around and Airbus makes the 280t version the new normal/standard, how much will this benefit the aircraft in terms of payload-range capability? Will it, for example, be able to realistically and economically fly DXB-LAX/DXB-South America?

On a side note, the A350-900 is gorgeous...

[ATLcrew]

I understand its legendary capabilities will be the stuff of legend.

[LH-B744]

Hi everyone!

I have a question about the A350-900.

How capable is it?

I really feel it is capable of a lot but am unable to quantify it. I have heard that it will have amazing take-off performance and be able to lift quite a bit.

In a real world setting, with high temperatures, winds, etc., what can the A350-900 do?

Once 2020 rolls around and Airbus makes the 280t version the new normal/standard, how much will this benefit the aircraft in terms of payload-range capability? Will it, for example, be able to realistically and economically fly DXB-LAX/DXB-South America?

On a side note, the A350-900 is gorgeous...

You are a little bit early, for European conditions, or even for this list (who on Earth operates that list, which only has been updated in March 2016!):
A350 orders and operators, not updated after March 2016 (in German).

So, you haven't seen the real thing? Me not either, only on a photo, and who provides brandnew aviation photos? At least concerning photos, you've chosen the right platform:
Star Alliance already flies her.

And, everytime that I am here I learn something, the #1 in the ranking 'the safest 60 airlines on Planet Earth in the year 2016', also already flies her:
Cathay Pacific A350-900 at Lohausen.

So, I don't know if one of the jetphotos co founder photographers, Mr Daryl Chapman, who btw was one reason why I chose this platform, and not one of the competitors, is still active.
But 'his' airline is up to date. Do we have a VHHH Jetphotos forum author?

If not, I like to take out the ruler again. Both photos have been taken on my home airport. So, let's measure.
VHHH - clearly more than 4978 nmi nonstop. And, if you don't know our 23L rwy, 9843 feet of Concrete have to be enough. My favourite airline always says, bah, to small, not enough. But they are corrected by the #1 in worldwide aviation safety!

A rough guess let's me assume that another airline is even better.
WSSS - clearly more than... fasten your seatbelts ... 5610 nmi nonstop. And they use the same EDDL 23L as LH or CX.

I think, this is enough for a first impression, isn't it?

[LH-B744]

I don't have to mention this link, as you probably have found it already, in English this time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350_XWB#Specifications

Let me compare it to my nickname:
A359 length: 66.8 m (219 ft)
B744 length (do you use the metric system?): 70.6 m (231 ft 10 in)

A359 wingspan: 64.75 m (212.4 ft, which somehow rings a bell in my head...)
B744 wingspan: 64.4 m (211.5 ft)

So, nobody can say that my home airport is not big enough for my nickname. But... [that's another discussion.]

A359 range with MTOW: 8,100 nmi
B744 range with MTOW: 7,260 nmi

A359 seat capacity on the longhaul: 253
B744 seat capacity on the longhaul: 350 (approx.)

Puh. I knew somewhere had to be a difference. But for airports that are considered 'too small' by my favourite airline, this seems to be

the perfect aircraft.

PS: Probably next time, I rather should compare 346 and 359...

[LH-B744]

Hi everyone!

[...]

I really feel it is capable of a lot but am unable to quantify it. I have heard that it will have amazing take-off performance and be able to lift quite a bit.

In a real world setting, with high temperatures, winds, etc., what can the A350-900 do?

Once 2020 rolls around and Airbus makes the 280t version the new normal/standard, how much will this benefit the aircraft in terms of payload-range capability? Will it, for example, be able to realistically and economically fly DXB-LAX/DXB-South America?

On a side note, the A350-900 is gorgeous...

The outer appearance of an aircraft can't be part of a discussion, or can it. If we take the two photos that I found in entry #3, then I like to say, two engined jets have always a little problem: you can't really imagine how big they are, until you read the spec sheet. The 359 is less than 4 meter shorter than my nickname. Would you've guessed that?

And the 359 wears some kind of sun glasses, like a coon, or a badger. It seems as if that could be the 359 trade mark, to distinguish it.

Gorgeous? Hm. You probably ask the wrong man, but.. in Singapore Air colors, I get a taste of what my favourite airline has ordered...

A workplace with future, without doubt.

And btw, why are you interested in it? Is your favourite airline also willing to order?

PS: And you should ask the right questions. Please, if you are so kind to reveal your location, you should ask for...
JNB - JFK for example. A little bit more than 6,975 nmi, so, no problem for the 359.
or
JNB - GRU. Wow. For this route you won't need the 359. You already have the SA-332. Not more than 4,000 nmi.

JNB - DUS? 4,768 nmi, only if somebody asks you.

I remember South African as a B744 operator, until in 2010, the 346 took over the SA-B744 heritage. You see, you've, at least somehow, asked the right man.

[MoKa777]

I understand its legendary capabilities will be the stuff of legend.

Sarcasm...? lol

[MoKa777]

You are a little bit early, for European conditions, or even for this list (who on Earth operates that list, which only has been updated in March 2016!):
A350 orders and operators, not updated after March 2016 (in German).

So, you haven't seen the real thing? Me not either, only on a photo, and who provides brandnew aviation photos? At least concerning photos, you've chosen the right platform:
Star Alliance already flies her.

And, everytime that I am here I learn something, the #1 in the ranking 'the safest 60 airlines on Planet Earth in the year 2016', also already flies her:
Cathay Pacific A350-900 at Lohausen.

So, I don't know if one of the jetphotos co founder photographers, Mr Daryl Chapman, who btw was one reason why I chose this platform, and not one of the competitors, is still active.
But 'his' airline is up to date. Do we have a VHHH Jetphotos forum author?

If not, I like to take out the ruler again. Both photos have been taken on my home airport. So, let's measure.
VHHH - clearly more than 4978 nmi nonstop. And, if you don't know our 23L rwy, 9843 feet of Concrete have to be enough. My favourite airline always says, bah, to small, not enough. But they are corrected by the #1 in worldwide aviation safety!

A rough guess let's me assume that another airline is even better.
WSSS - clearly more than... fasten your seatbelts ... 5610 nmi nonstop. And they use the same EDDL 23L as LH or CX.

I think, this is enough for a first impression, isn't it?

I have seen one. Singapore Airlines operates their A350-900 3 times a week on their SIN-JNB-SIN route.

Here at JNB we are fortunate that we have all the new generation aircraft operating. LH with the 748; VS, ET, KQ, QR with the 788/789; BA, LH, AF and soon again EK with the A380; SQ with the A350. It's quite exciting!

[MoKa777]

I don't have to mention this link, as you probably have found it already, in English this time:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A350_XWB#Specifications

Let me compare it to my nickname:
A359 length: 66.8 m (219 ft)
B744 length (do you use the metric system?): 70.6 m (231 ft 10 in)

A359 wingspan: 64.75 m (212.4 ft, which somehow rings a bell in my head...)
B744 wingspan: 64.4 m (211.5 ft)

So, nobody can say that my home airport is not big enough for my nickname. But... [that's another discussion.]

A359 range with MTOW: 8,100 nmi
B744 range with MTOW: 7,260 nmi

A359 seat capacity on the longhaul: 253
B744 seat capacity on the longhaul: 350 (approx.)

Puh. I knew somewhere had to be a difference. But for airports that are considered 'too small' by my favourite airline, this seems to be

the perfect aircraft.

PS: Probably next time, I rather should compare 346 and 359...

The outer appearance of an aircraft can't be part of a discussion, or can it. If we take the two photos that I found in entry #3, then I like to say, two engined jets have always a little problem: you can't really imagine how big they are, until you read the spec sheet. The 359 is less than 4 meter shorter than my nickname. Would you've guessed that?

And the 359 wears some kind of sun glasses, like a coon, or a badger. It seems as if that could be the 359 trade mark, to distinguish it.

Gorgeous? Hm. You probably ask the wrong man, but.. in Singapore Air colors, I get a taste of what my favourite airline has ordered...

A workplace with future, without doubt.

And btw, why are you interested in it? Is your favourite airline also willing to order?

PS: And you should ask the right questions. Please, if you are so kind to reveal your location, you should ask for...
JNB - JFK for example. A little bit more than 6,975 nmi, so, no problem for the 359.
or
JNB - GRU. Wow. For this route you won't need the 359. You already have the SA-332. Not more than 4,000 nmi.

JNB - DUS? 4,768 nmi, only if somebody asks you.

I remember South African as a B744 operator, until in 2010, the 346 took over the SA-B744 heritage. You see, you've, at least somehow, asked the right man.

You are right, the A350-900 is large based on its dimensions but, being a twin, this isn't instantly apparent.

I asked about DXB-LAX because that is often thought of as a big daddy for aircraft performance.

I am from South Africa. I would love for SAA to operate the A350 and I do believe it will be the most suitable aircraft for them.

[LH-B744]

You are right, the A350-900 is large based on its dimensions but, being a twin, this isn't instantly apparent.

I asked about DXB-LAX because that is often thought of as a big daddy for aircraft performance.

I am from South Africa. I would love for SAA to operate the A350 and I do believe it will be the most suitable aircraft for them.

Hm. You are wrong. I've mentioned the Kangaroos (they have a kangaroo on their tailfins). And I assume, with your home airport you should know them or even see them as often as the LH-B748 (retro).

In a different topic, I freely asked the question, which today is the longest flight in a commercial passenger jet?

The routes that you've mentioned are too short. Should I quote myself? Normally I don't do that. But for you.

'The Kangaroos clearly outnumber 6,800 on their way to Texas.'

But, to answer your question via a diversion, the Kangaroos, in contrast to my favourite airline, do not plan to use the 359. But, on their way to Texas, the Australians use the biggest doubledecker passenger jet between Germany and Australia.

And the 359 is able to fly parallel to the biggest airbus, nonstop between Texas and Australia. Can you follow me?

What you believe to be the longest route on this Planet is not the longest route. The Kangaroo route is at least 200 nmi longer. And for that route is valid, what I've said in this entry. The 359 (and the 748_) is able to fly parallel ...

PS: And, only this sunday, I promise, let me quote another one of my sentences. The Kangaroos daily do that because otherwise they'd not be able to leave their continent.
And all of the airlines who provide super long haul flights (more than 5,000 nmi) probably show a very poor performance in comparison to the Kangaroos. You know what they also do? Kangarooland - JFK with 1 stop.

Imagine they'd try that nonstop. 8,645 nmi or more (NOT possible for the 359). So, the benchmark for super long haul flights is clearly owned by the Australians. And even more. Probably, the Australians suffer under aircraft that can't fly 7,000 or 8,000 nmi nonstop .

I'd assume that this is the reason why Australia (and Europe) is one of the few continents that still operates the 744.

But if you ask me, the nonstop flight is limited. I can't imagine Germany - Australia nonstop, in no current aircraft and in no future aircraft!

[LH-B744]

Somewhere I've read that Joe Sutter had a problem in 2011, to sell the first two or three dozens of the 748. I don't know the reason.
I can say that it is not the fault of my favourite airline.

Looong before the 359, the 748 has been able to fly very very long super longhaul routes, e.g. Australia - Texas . But the Kangaroos own the 744ER, I really really love this bird, especially when they used it for flights to Germany.

Joe Sutter could've helped me if I asked him in 2015, when was the 744ER invented, and where was it sold. Afaik, Qantas owns the monopoly for the 744ER. So, they don't (yet) look for a successor..

With 359, you are really too early if you'd ask my favourite airline. So we should rather discuss air traffic of October 16th or 17th (2016).

PS: 5,963 nmi when the Kangaroos take off on your home airport, JNB, on their way home. That gives them many options, B744, B744ER, et cetera. It is almost a short haul for them (a little bit exaggerated). Do you know the real thing that they use?

I know that I am offtopic. But I dare it for this sparkling new member. The jetphotos answer is:
My avatar, only in QF colors, photographed in 2015.

I need recent information. Puh. Expedia and Qantas are NOT able to deliver that information to Europe. But Kingsford Smith gave me the flight number. So, I can say that the jetphotos answer is still current today.