Boeing, Boeing, Gone!

[vetteracer]

I don’t think the fellow was being unpatriotic, only stating some facts out of an article.

I despise the French; My Grandfather has walked with a limp almost all of his adult life from liberating that country. This is pale in comparison to what most gave. And anytime the French get a chance they poke us in the eye with a sharp stick.

Airbus is a multi-nation endeavor, but I think most of Europe is one step away from full-blown communism.

America needs to be revitalized. We need to focus on doing great things, and creating an economy of scale for the world to be in awe of. Instead we argue over tid bits that divide and concur our nation. A free market is the only thing we have going for us. So Boeing may need to get with the program, maybe not. This may have been just a tactic used by the DOT to chisel on Boeing a tad as well.

This idea falls on the heels of the airlines as well. How much time, energy and money are they going to spend to keep some of the old time airlines on life support? Someone has built a better and more efficient mousetrap.

 

[C601]

Airbus lands order for 20 jets to China
Alcatel has contract for design, produce Chinasat 9
European aircraft maker Airbus Friday said it landed a purchase order for 20 of its A330-300 jets for China Eastern Airlines.
Based on the $165 million list price for each of the jets, which can seat up to 335 passengers, the order is worth over $3 billion. Airlines typically negotiate a lower price. The Chinese airline group has options for 10 more of the jets


EADS plans to assemble its EC120 Colibri helicopter in China, and won an order for 8 of the helicopters, AFX News reported.

 

[Denizen]

A Question

"Airbus is a multi-nation endeavor, but I think most of Europe is one step away from full-blown communism."

How do YOU define communism?

Do you think Europe is doing away with private ownership of land ?

Please ...elaborate...No flames..just curious

 

[Russ]

ATL2CDG
Someone else beat me to the point when he or she posted a counter argument to yours based on the operational considerations and mission assumptions used by the USAF (and OMB) for airframe selection. Please respond if you have the expertise to do so. That said you can remain down at the lowest common denominator level with the name calling if you would prefer not to respond.

 

[vetteracer]

Quote

"How do YOU define communism?
Do you think Europe is doing away with private ownership of land?"

It was a rather tongue and cheek remark.

Well, in mainland Europe taxes are over 50%. Then add in the extra tax’s much like we have. Health care, Unemployment and the idea of an entitlement society. Basically the complete redistribution of wealth. Firearm ownership is diminishing as owning a gun is plagued with paper work, registration expense etc. Gasoline is around $5.00 a gallon, most of which is tax, yes owning land is very expensive, and business is taxed very heavy. So the reality of a common worker oneday owning his own company is dimmer and dimmer. Unemployement is in double digits in Europe. But that does not matter, as they get a check to.

Socialism would be a better term, but I think at the rate they are going in another 25 years they will be near it.

Mark

 

[ATL2CDG]

ATL2CDG
Someone else beat me to the point when he or she posted a counter argument to yours based on the operational considerations and mission assumptions used by the USAF (and OMB) for airframe selection. Please respond if you have the expertise to do so. That said you can remain down at the lowest common denominator level with the name calling if you would prefer not to respond.

I simply do not have the expertise to respond; my entire support of the issue was based on the fact that Airbus product met far more requirements than the Boeing according to the DOD report. If wingspan, ramp usage and other operation concerns were of such importance to the USAF, they would have been included in the original list of criteria and obviously the Airbus product would not have faired as well. However, given that the choice would be replacing the aging KC-135 fleets and that each of the choices are much more advanced that their predecessor, I think learning a new product (where Airbus or Boeing) would be well with in the capabilities of the USAF and her airmen/officers.

 

[Russ]

Quote from ATL2CDG
"I simply do not have the expertise to respond"

There is something to be said for sticking to subjects you are familiar with. From the certainty with which you posted I thought you might be knowledgeable beyond press releases. I was looking forward to a lively conversation.

 

[ATL2CDG]

Quote from ATL2CDG

"I simply do not have the expertise to respond"

There is something to be said for sticking to subjects you are familiar with. From the certainty with which you posted I thought you might be knowledgeable beyond press releases. I was looking forward to a lively conversation.

Well, I suppose a conversation could still be had...

After a couple of simple google searches:


KC-135 Specs.

Length:136' 3"
Height:38' 4"
Wingspan:130' 10"
Max Weight:297,000 lbs


KC-767 Proposed Specs.
Length 159 ft 2 in (48.5 m)
Wingspan 156 ft 1 in (47.5 m)
Height 52 ft (15.8 m)
Max T/O Weight 377,000 lb (171,000-175,000 kg)


General A330-200 Specs.

Length 193' 6"
Wing Span 197' 9"
Height 58' 0"
MTOW 507,150


As one can see, the KC-767 would already be noticeably longer (fuselage), wider (wingspan), taller and heavier (MTOW) than the KC-135. As such, one would assume that there would be operational issues with the Boeing product, just as there would be with the Airbus. While I have NO idea what hangar specifications/ramp limits are throughout the various USAF bases, one could assume that changes that would have to be made for the KC-767 could just as easily be made for the Airbus tanker. Therefore other issues, such as performance and mission needs, should be investigated as well.


Also, http://www.freep.com/money/business/boeing29_20040329.htm this is an interesting article about the issue.


Anyway... just some food for thought.

 

[DesertFalcon]

Boeing, Boeing, BOEING!

Maybe, if Boeing bounces high enough it will get the company into SPACE. Boeing's days on earth might be limited if it does'nt stay at the leading edge of technology. I think Boeing should enter the Space Race and become one of the major player in the privatization of Space.

What do you think?
Would this save boeing from disaster.
What if they wait to long, spend all of their resources on the 7E7, then find out it was a poor tactical move?

Your comments?

 

[enigma]

Boeing, Boeing, BOEING!

Maybe, if Boeing bounces high enough it will get the company into SPACE. Boeing's days on earth might be limited if it does'nt stay at the leading edge of technology. I think Boeing should enter the Space Race and become one of the major player in the privatization of Space.

What do you think?
Would this save boeing from disaster.
What if they wait to long, spend all of their resources on the 7E7, then find out it was a poor tactical move?

Your comments?

If you were to obtain and read Aviation Week and Space Technology, you would come to realize that space is larger at Boeing than commericial airplanes.

I don't usually care to look at financials, but I'd bet that if we did, we would find that commercial aircraft is already below space and defense in Boeings profit numbers.

enimga