A380 first flight 4/27!

[EuroWheenie]

bofecus

Correct, there are more 737 produced than the entire Airbus range. Hardly surprising is it, given that the 737 has been in production since 1960 something, whereas the A320 has been in production since 1984ish. A 25 year head start should produce some kind of result!

However, the A320 is the fastest selling commercial aircraft ever build.
The total number of orders/deliveries for the 737NG is 2447/1667 whereas the same figures for the A32X series is 3472/2408. In other words, Airbus has delivered almost as many A32X as Boeing has taken orders for the 737NG. If you insist on comparing apples and oranges, then go ahead. I belive this is a more accurate picture of the current market, not what the market was like in the 50s, 60s and 70s! And yes, I do appreciate that the A32X is a few years older than the 737NG. But it's still a better selling aeroplane today, which just goes to prove that giving a 40 year old design a make over does not make it a brand new one. And in there lies the Boeing problems; too many years resting on the laurels and bad mouthing the Airbus range. Seems like they finally woke up (787) to smell the roses, and about bloody time it was too!

You see, I'm not particularly pro Boeing or Airbus, neither am I anti any of the two. But seeing garbage being spread out as gospel (reminds me of Fox News btw) does get my knickers in a twist. Were someone to distort the picture in favour of Airbus, I'd react similarly.

 

[Whale Rider]

bofecus

Correct, there are more 737 produced than the entire Airbus range. Hardly surprising is it, given that the 737 has been in production since 1960 something, whereas the A320 has been in production since 1984ish. A 25 year head start should produce some kind of result!

However, the A320 is the fastest selling commercial aircraft ever build.
The total number of orders/deliveries for the 737NG is 2447/1667 whereas the same figures for the A32X series is 3472/2408. In other words, Airbus has delivered almost as many A32X as Boeing has taken orders for the 737NG. If you insist on comparing apples and oranges, then go ahead. I belive this is a more accurate picture of the current market, not what the market was like in the 50s, 60s and 70s! And yes, I do appreciate that the A32X is a few years older than the 737NG. But it's still a better selling aeroplane today, which just goes to prove that giving a 40 year old design a make over does not make it a brand new one. And in there lies the Boeing problems; too many years resting on the laurels and bad mouthing the Airbus range. Seems like they finally woke up (787) to smell the roses, and about bloody time it was too!

You see, I'm not particularly pro Boeing or Airbus, neither am I anti any of the two. But seeing garbage being spread out as gospel (reminds me of Fox News btw) does get my knickers in a twist. Were someone to distort the picture in favour of Airbus, I'd react similarly.

Wheenie,

You are pro-Airbus. No one here is stupid enough to believe you're not. The facts are distorted in favor of Airbus. How can you say things like "Beaten in every segment" and then make excuses like Boeing has been building airplanes longer then Airbus? If thats not distorting the facts in favor of Airbus I don't know what is. Also remember that Airbus has gone ahead in a weak American Market. Lets see how well they fair in a strong one...with no (So Called) loans????

 

[EuroWheenie]

Whale Rider

Took the data straight from the horses mouth. Boeing may have "letters of intent" for 217 examples, but they themselves only list the 64 that has been confirmed. Airbus does not list "letters of intent", only confirmed orders, and noone has firmed up any intent to purchase the A350. Incidentially, I don't think the A350 is anything but a vague attempt from Airbus to steal some sunshine from Boeing, much the same as the Cronic Snoozer stole some from the A380. And if the published figures is anything to go by, the 787 seems to have the advantage over the A350. The only concern some airlines seem to have with the 787 is the composite fuselage, and the associated problems of economical repairs of ramp rash (i.e. some dork backing the catering van into and puncturing the fueselage).

However, even with Boeing gaining an extra 143 orders over Airbus hardly changes the overall picture does it?

But I do think that Boeing may just gain the momentum now, if they relatively quickly downsize the 787 technology and produce a single-aisle bleedless, composite, aircraft to compete with the A32X. If they can make it common enough to offer the same typerating as the 787 and 777, then they have a winner and Airbus will have to play catch-up. Then it would be a question of up-scaling the technology, and offer a 777 replacement that'll blow the A330/340 clear out of the water and the present situation will be reversed. And so far and so forth. If I've learned anything in this business it is that it's cyclic. Airbus has been edging into the lead for the last 15 odd years, and will probably stay there until Boeing can get a 737 replacement off the ground.

 

[Whale Rider]

Orders are orders pal..stop twisting the facts as you say.

 

[EuroWheenie]

Whale Rider

Let me clarify then. When I said "beaten in every segment" I was of course referring to the current market. Otherwise Douglas would have been the clear winner with the DC-3, right? I'm not making up the numbers, Boeing and Airbus are. And, based on current numbers, Airbus does have Boeing beaten in every single segment. I do agree that historically Boeing has build many more aircraft than Airbus, but that is worth very little in todays market.

I don't think that neither Boeing or Airbus is placing the US market on top of their agenda. Yes, it's by far the biggest in the world but it's very far from being the biggest growth market, and it's very unlikely it will become that even if all the US legacy carriers would make a profit. For a producer of new aircraft, the natural markets to look for is those that are growing. And that is Asia and the Middle East primarily, Europe and South America secondarily.

But what you're really trying to tell me, I suppose, is that US carriers are extremely nationalisticly minded and would buy American even if a better, but foreign made, product was available? Yup, that sounds like a really intelligent thing to do! You will of course know that both Air France, KLM, Lufthansa, British Airways, Alitalia and Iberia are running fairly large fleets of Boeing aircraft. They also run large, if not bigger, fleets of Airbusses. How many Airbusses do Delta, American and Continental operate? (Yes, I know that United is a fairly big A32X operator, and that US Air's got a fair chunk too)

 

[EuroWheenie]

Whale Rider

No, a "letter of intent" is not an order. An order is an order when money's on the table, not a second before. The current Air India/Airbus debate over the order of 40ish A32X aircraft is a case in point. Hell, "my" airline placed a "letter of intent" for 44 ex. BA 757s to be converted to freighters, but ended up buying "only" 34.

And if anyone's twisting the numbers, it's Airbus and Boeing; I'm only quoting direct from their websites!

 

[bocefus]

A-380, just like the Concorde, will be a symbol of prestige and commercial failure

 

[bocefus]

Meanwhile, back at the ranch Boeing is quietly developing this
http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2005/q1/nr_050222g.html
Of course, it is only intended to be used for transporting 787 subassemblies. Hmmm, I wonder why they are pursuing certification?

 

[EuroWheenie]

bofecus

Judged on your earlier statement that "there are more 777 than A330/340 flying", and your apparent unwillingness to admit mistake and retract statement, your creditability is somewhat shot to pieces. But I must congratulate you for being able to see into the future; where can one acquire such a skill? And with that skill, why are you sprouting BS on a website rather than picking next weeks lottery numbers?

 

[EuroWheenie]

Latest: Gear and flaps have been retracted and there was a live voice feed from the cockpit a few moments ago where the crew said they were "happy". I suppose that's always the case, at least I cannot remember hearing a testpilot saying on the first flight that the aeroplane was crap

Expected to fly-by TLS at 14:00 local (12:00UTC) and land at around 14:15.

Take-off roll took only 25 seconds, which surprised even Airbus who had expected it to last "a little longer". And did you see those wings flex! She may be butt ugly on the ground, but oh Man once she took to her right element the elegance started to show. As someone else said, those wings are a thing of beauty!

It has already blown the (passenger version) of the 747 clear out of the water, and will set the standards for wide-bodies for a long time to come. Expect orders from BA and CX within the not too distant future, and if JAL can overcome their institutional and unfounded dislike of Airbus, or rather undying love of Boeing, there is a 850 pax version just waiting to be certified for them.

Airbus needs something like 300 orders to break even, and is roughly half-way there. First delivery by end 2006; it will sell and it will make Airbus tons of money.

 

[bocefus]

"All launch aid to Airbus, apart from the initial A300, has been in the form of repayable loans. Unlike the R&D support Boeing has been enjoying for the US governement, which is not repayable. So from a taxpayers point of view, I'd say us Euro's are better off than you Yanks."

And you don't reckon that EADS/AIRBUS enjoys plenty of R&D support from the EU governments? You don't reckon that AIRBUS benefits from and has made use of NASA aerodynamic research? Those loans you mention are only "repayable" if the aircraft line is profitable. Got any numbers on how many of the "loans" have been paid back? Why is that Airbus is so reluctant to take the subsidies issue to the WTO?

 

[bocefus]

"bofecus

Judged on your earlier statement that "there are more 777 than A330/340 flying", and your apparent unwillingness to admit mistake and retract statement, your creditability is somewhat shot to pieces. But I must congratulate you for being able to see into the future; where can one acquire such a skill? And with that skill, why are you sprouting BS on a website rather than picking next weeks lottery numbers?"

Ummm, I said this?

 

[EuroWheenie]

bofecus

Sincere apologies mate, that statement was made by Whale Rider

Still like to learn how to see into the future though

 

[bocefus]

Apologies accepted. Now then, back to my questions of you.

 

[EuroWheenie]

bofecus

EADS does enjoy very little direct R&D support, and what it get is earmarked for A400M and MBDA development.

I don't think that Airbus are any more reluctant than Boeing to go to the WTO, however let's not forget who started this whole debate - namely Boeing to put a stop to the A350 receiving launch aid. Let's not fool ourselves, both manufacturers receive aid - it's just in different forms. Now since the US brought the skeletons out of the closet, by unilaterally withdrawing from the 1992 agreement, it's only natural for Airbus to fight back. You didn't expect them to roll over and play dead did you? It is worth mentioning that the 1992 agreement is still in force; it's just that the US has stated it won't be utilising the option of having the government providing finance (repayable with interests) for up to 33% of development costs. There is nothing stopping Airbus for pursuing the finance for the A350, and chances are they will.

As it is, both sides are seeing things from their point of view, and both are keeping themselves busy mudding the waters. Latest is that the EU wants the WTO talks to include the launch aid promised by Japan for the 787, whereas the US says "we'll look at that later". Sadly, the US have a very poor track record when it comes to promises of "looking at that later". The steel tariff being a case in point, a case the US is set to loose in WTO talks. Airbus has made claims that Boeing has received non-refundable subsidies to the tune of USD 20 Billion, in the form of R&D and tax relief. I haven't heard the return salvo from Boeing on that one, but I'm confident they'll fire off something but most likely in a different direction just to confuse the hell out of everybody. It's politics mate, it's not as if it's really founded in reality! And that goes for both parties, or rather all 4 parties.

Airbus/EADS is showing a healthy profit, and the countries that contributed to the A320 launch are now seeing a return on investment. That is to say that the loans have been paid back, and they are now receiving a royalty on every single aircraft produced. I can't find it at the moment, but there was a paper out saying that the A320 royalties have also paid back the direct launch grants (not loans, straight hand-outs) for the A300/A310 development.

You are incorrect in stating that the loans will only be paid back if the lines are profitable. From the moment the first airframe is delivered, the loans are being paid back. Besides, it's hardly relevant since all current lines in the Airbus factory, apart from the A380 obviously, are showing a profit.

Is Airbus benefitting from NASA studies? Don't know. Would NASA exist today without Werner Von Braun? Don't know about that either.