You're basically taking a proven design and
making it substantially cheaper to operate, which is always without
question a winning combination. All other things being equal I expect
both planes to succeed, but the 7E7 to be more profitable.

The 380 is to the 747 what the 7E7 is to the 767.

However, the 7E7 is far from a proven design. composite fulselage and
bleed air replaced with all electric systems. It may look promising,
it but itsn't proven yet.

We'll know in a few months if the 380 has delivered on promises or
not.

Proven or not, both have the chance to be 'disruptive technologies'.

Suppose the A380 is wildly popular. Its low cost per pax makes most
747s obsolete, and everywhere you now run a 747 an A380 is needed to
remain competitive. Boeing offers 747 Adv, but none are ordered and the
program is cancelled, killing the 747 cash cow once and for all. I
would imagine Boeing would have to do what Harry said, and make a big
plane too. That would be quite disruptive to Boeing.

Suppose the 7E7 is wildly popular. It's light weight, efficient
engines, 3 day assembly time and very low maintainence cost makes all
competing metal aircraft (A300/A310/A330/B757/B767) obsolete. Boeing's
new business model (just design and do final assembly, leave the rest to
partners) gives it the large profits needed to make composite
replacements to 737, 747 and 777. I imagine Airbus would have to redo
their entire product line too, and that will be very disruptive,
especially if their access to launch aid is curtailed.

I know I'm exaggerating and things never move that fast, but as you say,
we'll all know in time. I do believe one thing that Boeing is saying:
from now on, all future transports will be made of composites (the
advantages in weight, maintenance and fabrication expense are impossible
to ignore) and that will change a lot of things.

--lw--