You want the A380 to be a failure?

[bocefus]

Thanks for correcting me, I forgot to include the other Airbus owner, BAE in my post. 2004 saw a significantly greater disparity, BAE/EADS had about 10 billion more in revenues than Boeing.

The industry doesn't need the A-380, but the EU does.

 

[EagleRJ]

The French cabinet burst into applause when President Jacques Chirac announced the A380 had successfully taken off. Chirac hailed its safe return as a "total success" of the project which had written a new page of aeronautical history.

His close ally German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder saluted a victory for European industrial policy: "This shows that when we work hard ... we can be the best in the world.

"total success of the project"? "a victory for European industrial policy"? Isn't the aim of privately owned companies to not only produce a product, but to see that the product is profitable for customers, and finally to earn a profit for the company? First Flight is only one early stage of an aircraft project.

This project is still filled with massive concerns for the airlines. It's the first civil aircraft with a 5000 PSI hydraulic system, and the first to use the untried GLARE aluminum/composite sandwich in the fuselage. It's still well over the design weight, and still hasn't passed an evacuation test. It's also 30% larger than the largest aircraft airport infrastructure has been designed around for 35 years.

Airbus has a ways to go before it sees a profit from the A380. It posts a list price of $250M-$285M, depending on options, but industry sources claim the first few customers have signed on the bottom line for $180M each. Airbus claims a 250-aircraft break even, but industry experts see the number at close to three times that, considering what the planes are selling for, and the fact that the project is $2B over budget already.
Does EADS need to worry about this project succeeding in order to protect the shareholders and the solvency of the company? No. That illustrates the primary difference between EADS and Boeing.

 

[TonyC]

Cheerleading for your team is great, but surely there's got to be a limit. When you're the only one in the bleachers wearing a block of cheese on your head, and your bare beer belly is painted "GO TEEM" in minus 30 windchill, you might look a little ridiculous. The cameraman is not focused on you because of your superior intellect, friend!


(Bocefus, you should look at your belly in the mirror! )


Obviously, the arguments are not simple, or they would have received a rapid hearing and resolution in the WTO. The fact that Boeing and Airbus are still in negotiations of one form or another over these issues indicates there is ground to be made on both sides. At least EuroWheenie has made an attempt to present some resources, from both sides of the argument I might add, to back up his claims. Believe me, I'm no fan of EuroWheenie. He and I disagree about most everything other than the makeup of the ocean and the color of the sky. But in the academic process of debate, he's the clear winner of this round.


So, cheer all you want - - there's no harm in that. But maybe it's time to put a shirt on, how 'bout it?

 

[surplus1]

I have to wonder if those who hope for the A380's failure are really ignorant enough to think that each A380 and 787 will be handbuilt by garlicky Frenchmen or apple pie-loving Americans respectively. Are they really that much in the dark as to how a global economy works?


Each A380 ordered will provide work for Americans at GE, Pratt & Whitney, Alcoa, Fairchild, Parker, Goodrich and dozens of other american employers. By the same token each 787 ordered will bring jobs to Fuji Heavy Industries, Mitsubishi, Kawasaki (Japan), Messiers Dowty, Messiers Bugatti (France), Smiths (UK) and dozens of other overseas employers.

The tone of those who hope for the failure of the A380 is at best reminiscent of a locker-room shoving match and at worst it is rabid nationalism.

The ignorance of these arguments is compounded by the hipocricy. As previously mentioned I doubt any of the A380 critics would ever tell a FedEx interviewer that they aren't interested in a position that might involve driving an A380.

Read a book folks. This aint your father's economy.

Good post! With the exception of EuroWheenie (and now TonyC whose post I just read after originally writing this) you seem to be the only one that understands the true nature of a global economy.

Personally, I would like to see the success of both Boeing and Airbus with their new products. As a native born American of European descent, a fact that most Americans who are of the same ancestry choose not to acknowledge, I'm not unable to realize that while designed in America, the Boeing 787 is essentially an aircraft that will be built in Japan. Likewise, while designed in Europe, the A380 will be full of components produced by American companies.

The two aircraft have different missions. Condemning either one of them based on the origin of its design is rather infantile.

I can't help but wonder what will happen should the negotiations fail and the WTO decide in favor of Europe rather than the US. Will the Bush administration then withdraw from the WTO as it advocates withdrawing from the UN when it can't get its way? It wouldn't surprise me. There's as much narrow mindedness in the White House as there is in this forum.

 

[bocefus]

The problem with and your cheerleaders Tony, is that you can't identify the teams. This is bigger than Airbus versus Boeing, the teams are the EU and their social agenda and the US and our way of life. Think about that and let us know which team you are rooting for.

 

[surplus1]

Bocefus,

How quickly you forget that what you call "our way of life" is born of European parentage. Shallow.

 

[bocefus]

Talk about shallow, you seem to be enamoured of that way of life, why don't you move back? I for one am thankful that my forefathers had the gumption and wisdom to leave that God foresaken place, leaving the crap behind and taking along the few positive features.

 

[Icelandair]

there is no such country as the EU.

 

[TonyC]

The problem with and your cheerleaders Tony, is that you can't identify the teams. This is bigger than Airbus versus Boeing, the teams are the EU and their social agenda and the US and our way of life. Think about that and let us know which team you are rooting for.

Did the space aliens leave a little computer chip implanted behind your ear, too?



I'm rooting for the Detroit Tigers.



.

 

[bocefus]

Who said there was? I am referring to the United States of America versus the United States of Europe, commonly known as the EU.

 

[EuroWheenie]

TonyC

Don't remember us having a discussion over the composition of the sea and the colour of the sky, but I'm willing to go down that road if it'll lead to an interesting debate

bofecus

The US airline industry may not need the A380, but then again apart from NW and UA they don't need the 747 (pax version) either. In either case, there are around 150 confirmed orders that prove you wrong including most of the major Asian airlines (every single one really, except CX, JL and ANA) and that's where the market is. As for you bringing down this discussion even further by alledging it's a contest over EU vs US lifestyles ... nah, won't go there. Let's just say that the EU countries does not display a single way of life as is the case in the US. There are vast differences in both culture, governance, democracy and politics. Europe range from pretty far left (Socialist Portugal) to pretty far right (Ultra-liberalistic Italy) with everything imagineable in between.

Don't know who it was, but someone said (correctly according to what I've learned here about the 787 orders and LoI's) that the 787 has outsold the A380. Yep, and the A320 series has outsold the 747 which proves absolutely f. all. They are hardly competitors. A more correct comparison would be A350 vs 787, where Boeing has more or less swept the carpet away under Airbus. And jolly good for them it is too!

Now if Boeing would just take advantage of the momentum gained with the 787 technology, downscale it and launch a 737 replacement then the tables would truly be turned and we would have Boeing taking the lead. There are rumours that the 787 will be cockpit compatible with the 777; imagine a single-aisle family aircraft that was also common - a major unque selling point of Airbus would then vanish.

 

[bocefus]

Ahhh Detroit, that pretty much splains it,

 

[surplus1]

Talk about shallow, you seem to be enamoured of that way of life, why don't you move back? I for one am thankful that my forefathers had the gumption and wisdom to leave that God foresaken place, leaving the crap behind and taking along the few positive features.

Congratulations! A perfect example of the absence of both objectivity and thought. There is no need to say more, you've done it for me.

 

[ProLine4]

Another issue that has not been addressed in this particular discussion is the fact that of the 154 ordered frames, Emirates (EK) is responsible for 43, a 27% portion of the backlog. Before anyone says it, yes this has occured with Boeing new aircraft programs too...Pan Am and the 747. Not to start a completely different discussion, but many within the industry are skeptical that EK can maintain such ambitious growth plans and eventually become a 1 billion RPK/year airline. I'll leave it to Typhoonpilot to provide any other information beyond that.

Anyways, if EK cannot maintain their current growth plans and business model, there could potentially be some deferrals or swaps to smaller aircraft in the Airbus family. Airbus is certainly open to this decision (UPS's recent cancellation of 37 A306F in exchange for 10 A388F, as an example), but again this brings up the problem that, at least according to their media releases, they'll need to sell 250 frames in order for the project to break even. Assuming they made that calculation on list price for the A380, they'll need to sell well beyond that number given the fact that such customers as EK, Singapore (launch customer), and Virgin Atlantic were certainly given substantial discounts off the list price.
Beyond EK, most operators have not ordered large numbers of the airplane despite Airbus's claim of a demand for 1,250 500+seat aircraft within the next 30 years. British Airways has publicly stated they see no immediate need for the A380 given that their oldest 744s are only 15 years old, and their next project will be the 767-300ER replacement around 2010. JAL and ANA have not placed any orders yet to provide additional capacity on the Intra-Japan shuttle markets currently operated primarily with 744D and 773. To sum it up, from an orders perspective alone, Airbus will likely be fighting a tough battle in the years to come.

 

[bocefus]

Ahhh, now the Euroman is an industry analyst/expert. We can argue this forever, please hold on to my posts that the A-380 will be a commercial failure in terms of sales versus cost to produce. In short order this will be evident. Also please hold on to my post that the subsidies issue will come to a head soon, and it won't be favorable to you, the EU and Airbus.

"Congratulations! A perfect example of the absence of both objectivity and thought.", Yah, unlike this revelation, "How quickly you forget that what you call "our way of life" is born of European parentage. Shallow."

 

[TonyC]

Ahhh Detroit, that pretty much splains it,

You haven't the foggiest notion, friend.


I suppose we should judge you based on the European fashion line featured in your Avatar and the juvenile group of letters listed in your Profile under "Ratings"?


Your belly's jigglin', and it don't look purty.

 

[bocefus]

Judge as you wish Elvis, I'll match ratings, total time and experience with you anytime, I don't feel the need to impress the kiddies here

 

[TonyC]

Judge as you wish Elvis, I'll match ratings, total time and experience with you anytime, I don't feel the need to impress the kiddies here

Ratings, time, and flight experience are meaningless in this discussion. Intellect would be helpful. You're embarrassing yourself. I tired to warn you.






.


EDIT: I noticed a typo and endeavored to repair it. I intended to change "I tired to warn you" to "I tried to warn you", but realized it may have been, instead of a typographical error, a fitting Freudian slip. Observing that, I'll let it stand as written.

 

[EuroWheenie]

bofecus

My favourite opponent, let me tell you something. There is no such thing as the 'United States of Europe' and, in if you're thinking in the same sense as United States of America, there never will be.

There are huge cultural differences, different languages, different political systems and different social systems. We don't even have the same currency (Denmark, Sweden and the UK not being in the Euro) and not even the Schengen agreement reaches across all EU member states (The UK and Eire opting to stay out) whereas non-EU countries are Schengen members (Norway and Iceland).

What the EU is, is a common market that's slowly evolving into a more tightly knitted society. But there is not, and nor is there planned to be, a common 'federal' tax policy which, I trust you'll agree with, is a rather vital component of an integrated bundle of states a la the USA. VAT may be harmonized, but then again it may not. We will not abandon our individual parliaments, but some areas such as defence and foreign policy may be coordinated via the EU. The proposed EU constitution (which, incidentially, looks set to be voted down) mandates that countries may opt, on a case-by-case basis, to agree or not to EU foreign policy.

Denmark opted to stay out of the Defence, Social and Monetary agreements, as did the UK. The 'Grande Armee' plan is largely a French/German idea which has the backing of, among others, the Netherlands, Greece and Italy.

In short, we're 24 different countries and we'd like to keep it that way. Yes, there are many areas where further cooperation would be mutually beneficial, and there are others where it would not. The Scandinavian nations will not give up their welfare model in favour of lower taxes for some, just like the UK won't give up having the lowest tax rates in the EU in favour of adopting the Scandinavian welfare model.

As for the "kiddies" comment. Why, thank you mate! I'm well on my way to be pushing 40, and is slowly feeling the effects that has on my body. It's been ages since I've been called a kid. Thanks, you made my day there

 

[EuroWheenie]

Surplus1

On the subject of global economy vis a vis the 787/A380 debate. I find it comforting that the A380 will be standing on an American (BFGoodrich?) main landing gear, whereas the 787 will be standing on a French (Hispano-Suiza?) ditto. The irony in that has got to get a few knickers in a twist on this site

 

[mzaharis]

Thanks for correcting me, I forgot to include the other Airbus owner, BAE in my post. 2004 saw a significantly greater disparity, BAE/EADS had about 10 billion more in revenues than Boeing.

The industry doesn't need the A-380, but the EU does.

My search was very quick, and I haven't seen numbers for 2004, but in 2001, BAE/EADS had combined Defense sales greater than Boeing, too.

http://www.defensenews.com/content/features/2002chart1.html

 

[svcta]

Let's get off the "my dad can beat up your dad" crap. People who don't fly busses don't like them because nobody actually flies them. People who(think that they) do fly them like them becuase when they accidentally hit the stick with their elbows while building plastic models of airplanes they actually COULD fly on the card table where the yolk should be the airplane effectively replies: "What are you doing.........Dave?" and keeps going.


Besides, a french dad can't beat up anything.

 

[TonyC]

TonyC

Don't remember us having a discussion over the composition of the sea and the colour of the sky, but I'm willing to go down that road if it'll lead to an interesting debate

We've never discussed the composition of the sea, but your "salty divide" comment leads me to believe we agree on its saline content. Our beliefs on how it came into existence is another story entirely. (Let's be big boys and save that discussion for another thread, shall we?)

As for the color of the sky, well, I think that falls into the same category. Again, we'd disagree on how it came to be, but apart from that, our primary difference would only concern the spelling of the word "color."

 

[EuroWheenie]

TonyC

Roger on that mate. Ever read the most excellent "Revocation of Independence"? One of the rules there is that Microsoft should be told there is no such thing as American English, and correct their spill chucker accordingly

I do like that expression, Salty Divide, though. Wasn't it Churchill who said (on the US and UK) something along the lines of "Two nations divided by a common language"?

Did someone say aluminium by the way

Agreed, let's leave the "how we came to be here" for a really slow news day!

 

[TonyC]

Let's get off the "my dad can beat up your dad" crap. People who don't fly busses don't like them because nobody actually flies them. People who(think that they) do fly them like them becuase when they accidentally hit the stick with their elbows while building plastic models of airplanes they actually COULD fly on the card table where the yolk should be the airplane effectively replies: "What are you doing.........Dave?" and keeps going.


Besides, a french dad can't beat up anything.

LOL. Progress, at last! Now we've graduated from juvenile rants to sophmoric arguments.


Lying next to my keyboard here is a sophisticated paper ariplane "model" that I downloaded from the Airbus website and printed on cardstock. It's too complicated to use scissors, so I've been waiting until I can find my exacto knife. Soon I'll have my own flying paper A380!



Oh, and by the way... Where, exactly, should a yolk be on an airplane?




(HINT: yoke? )








.

 

[TonyC]

Wasn't it Churchill who said (on the US and UK) something along the lines of "Two nations divided by a common language"?

Yes, I believe that was attributed to him.

Speaking of which... I don't know if it's intentional or not, but your continued misspelling of "bocefus" might be hurting his feelings. "fecus" sounds a lot like a nasty subject with which he'd probably not appreciate being associated. "Bocephus" is the nickname for Hank Williams, Jr., which he has, ironically, apparently himself misspelled.

On the other hand, he might be getting a kick out of it, I dunno. Just thought I'd mention it on the outside chance it's unintentional.








.

 

[surplus1]

Oh, and by the way... Where, exactly, should a yolk be on an airplane?
.

Tony,

I'm surprised you don't know that. Ans: Why, at the center of its eggenage, of course!

 

[EuroWheenie]

TonyC

"In the outside chance" - like the chance of me winning this argument with bocefus?

Actually, it was not intentional and I offer my apologies.

Now time to get off this 'puter and go to hitch a ride to CPH and a party at the Bazooka on Saturday!

Been good discussing with you all. Enjoy the week-end ...

 

[TonyC]

Tony,

I'm surprised you don't know that. Ans: Why, at the center of its eggenage, of course!

LOL Made my day!





Thanks, Surplus!




.

 

[CSY Mon]

Well there boys and girls.

Not about to join the debate on lifestyles USA vs USE, having spent half my life on each, I finally voted with my feet.

As for the A-380 over-weight issue and if that could hurt the program?

Well, the 747-100 had the same issues: The design weight was about 670,000 lbs, but like almost every new airplane, it came it over...
Boeing decided to increase the max take off weight to 734,000 and ask Pratt to boost output of the engines to compensate, they did and the range and pay-load numbers were met..As for the fuel burn, it actually went down with later versions of the JTD-9 engine and everybody was content.

Tony C:

I always thought a proper Freudian slip was somehow sexually related?
Prey tell you have no such feeling for certain members of this board..?...