# Is the A350 more efficent than the B787?

I have wondered this because the Trent 1000 engines are very similar to the Trent XWB engines on the 787. And if the A350 has better efficiency then why do so many airlines purchase the 787?

• I feel these should be split in different questions. – Federico Aug 10 '15 at 14:48
• Honestly, these kinds of comparisons are hard to do without proprietary information because a lot of the numbers aren't public and efficiency can be measured many different ways. The most common is probably fuel per passenger-mile, but that depends on each individual airline's seating configuration and also ignores any other revenue cargo that might also be on board. And all fuel efficiency numbers will vary with weight, temperature, altitude, exact course, distance flown, etc., which vary from one flight to the next, let alone one aircraft to another. – reirab Aug 10 '15 at 14:53
• Don't forget other market considerations like the fact that 787 was to the market earlier. – Jan Hudec Aug 10 '15 at 17:42

Second, Airbus has seen some production problems in its larger airliners, which tends to make airlines nervous. The A380 saw cancellations totaling over $10 billion in lost revenue primarily due to its inability to make them fast enough, causing Airbus to indefinitely delay production of freight variants that major shipping companies were waiting for. Smaller, older production lines have been doing better but the A380 line is still taking up a lot of Airbus's resources that could be spent making 350s. Third is simple cost. A 787-8's base price is about \$225 million. An A350 starts at about \$270 million. \$45 million a plane is nothing to sneeze at; it means you can have 6 Dreamliners for the cost of 5 A350s, and the major airlines are buying 40-50 of these planes each so the savings is considerable.