Boeing Compares 747X and Airbus A3XX Economics

Boeing comparisons of 747X and A3XX economics are based on its Boeing's own "Boeing A3XX" design, and not on numbers published by Airbus or included in the European group's offers to airlines, according to John Roundhill, Boeing Commercial VP for product strategy and development.

The A3XX numbers, which show an economic advantage for the 747X, are based on a Boeing audit process that is also used to evaluate the company's own new aircraft, says Roundhill. "It's a capability developed inside Boeing," according to Roundhill. "We don't apply factors to the design. We build up the numbers from ground zero."

Boeing does not present its assessment of the A3XX in detail, but it appears to represent a significant discount from published Airbus figures. Boeing, for example, claims that the 747X "flies about 700 nmi further than the A3XX." Boeing claims a range of 7,600 nmi for the 747X with 522 passengers (in a three-class layout, with flight-attendant rest areas and galley stowage in the upper lobe), suggesting a range of 6,900 nmi for the "Boeing" A3XX-100. Airbus claims 7,800­8,150 nmi for the A3XX-100. The 12% range difference implies a similar difference in fuel burn between Airbus and Boeing figures for the A3XX, with a consequent impact on operating cost.

The range difference also allows Boeing to compare the stretched 747X head-on with the A3XX-100. As a shorter-range aircraft with virtually zero growth potential, the 747X Stretch has an inherent advantage over the A3XX-100 and will tend to be competitive in economic terms-just as an A321 beats a 757. But on an equal-range basis, using Airbus and Boeing numbers, the 747 would be compared with the 650-seat A3XX-200, which will be a much tougher competitor on a seat-mile basis because it carries more than 25% more people.

Boeing's version of the A3XX design includes the company's own assumptions of installed engine performance, weight and wing efficiency. Boeing's director of product marketing, Joe Ozimek, says that Boeing's own studies have consistently shown that dual-deck designs are heavier than single decks. He also asserts that Airbus uses different standards for engine performance, so Boeing's audit applies a 2.5% penalty to the A3XX on that account. Boeing has also disputed Airbus' wing efficiency and claims that the A3XX has no significant advantage over the 747X wing.

Ozimek bristles at any implication that Boeing's assessment of the A3XX is not objective. "It's not brain surgery," he says.

By Bill Sweetman