% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Cytec Industries Inc. Message Board

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the posts
  • excapnal excapnal Mar 11, 2008 8:08 PM Flag

    Tanker contract: BA vs Airbus

    C'mon - there must be some Engineered Materials folks out there - how does CYT compare as a qualified supplier between the two companies??

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Well both planes are made primarily out of aluminum. The commercial version of the A330 has a higher composites content than the commercial 767 (around 12% to 3% I think). I don't know how different the tanker versions are, but I would think it would be pretty similar. Cytec supplies both companies (along with Hexcel, Toray, Mitsubishi and Toho) I don't know who the main CF suppliers are for these specific programs though.

      • 1 Reply to fbm1116
      • I am surprised that these planes will be "mostly aluminum", but, upon refection, it makes some sense.

        I guess designing an airframe for a tanker does not make it worthwhile to substitute composites for aluminum. The actual flying hours for these tankers is apparently small, given the age of the existing fleet. The plane is built around a fixed payload in a fixed space. A tanker could be assumed to be either full, at its max weight, or returning empty. Still, if both are aluminum honeycomb planes, the primer and adhesive per plane is still interesting. I would also assume that CYT is not exclusive on those drawings.

        Based on your numbers for composites, CYT may be better off if the A330 is built.

        I remain skeptical that the CF issue is important beyond the value of secure raw material for CYT.

        Thanks for the reasoned response!

75.17+0.02(+0.03%)Dec 8 4:01 PMEST