You want the A380 to be a failure?

[cforst513]

honestly, why do aesthetics play a role when deciding the worth of an airplane? does it fly? is it safe and reliable? well, the A380 flew today, but its safety and reliability will be determined later. who cares if you think it's ugly? i'd be happy to be fliying it if that meant i was employed!!! i'll fly any ugly plane if it is safe and it means i have a job.

 

[Flywrite]

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.

 

[Blue]

There seems to be several posts that imply they want the project to be a failure. One can't help but think that most of these posts are driven by a juvenile nationalist anti France mentality....

Well, during the NCAA Basketball Championships, I wanted the Illini to stomp all over North Carolina.

Is that becasue I hated North Carolina? No, I'm just rooting for the home team.

 

[JimNtexas]

As American it is frustrating to see that while our goverment is putting Boeing execs in jail and taking away billion dollar contracts, the French are giving Airbus non-recourse loans.

But as a pilot an engineer, I salute Airbus for an outstanding technical acheivement.

 

[Corona]

honestly, why do aesthetics play a role when deciding the worth of an airplane? does it fly? is it safe and reliable? well, the A380 flew today, but its safety and reliability will be determined later. who cares if you think it's ugly? i'd be happy to be fliying it if that meant i was employed!!! i'll fly any ugly plane if it is safe and it means i have a job.

I agree: Flying an ugly plane is better than not flying at all. I'd fly it in a heartbeat. However, by a curious coincidence, I have observed that the ugliest planes I've flown were also the worst-flying ones as well.

It is mean-spirited to wish the A380 to fail. We don't need any more negativity in aviation these days, IMHO.

That being said, it IS an ugly airplane. It'll never compare with the 744 in terms of class. Sorry, Francois.

C

 

[FL000]

One can't help but think that most of these posts are driven by a juvenile nationalist anti France mentality

...and?

 

[EuroWheenie]

On subsidies

Since noone here seems willing to listen anyway, I wonder why I even bother. However, someone has got to provide a counter point to the ignorance being sprouted here. Do you get all your information from Fox, that beacon of 'fair and balanced' reporting, or are you so dim that you trust the politicians and their spinmeisters?

In any case, here are a couple of links with which to eduate yourselves but before you get to that will you please tell me which part of this sentence you are unable to comprehend:

Under the current agreement, European governments can lend money to cover up to 33% of plane manufacturers' research and development costs. This money is repayable with interest within 17 years

One Side Of The Issue:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/airlines/story/0,1371,1323657,00.html

http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2004/10/eu-takes-us-to-wto-over-boeing.php

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3569062.stm

The Other Side Of The Issue:

http://news.airwise.com/story/view/1111300394.html

http://www.newsfactor.com/story.xht...nts_on_Boeing_Airbus_Subsidies&story_id=32603

A Fairly Balanced View:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/207500_boeingeu12.html

One quote from which reads:

The decision heads off the immediate threat of a court case after the United States filed a complaint at the WTO on Oct. 6, a month before the presidential election, saying European government loans to Airbus worth $15 billion amount to illegal subsidies under global trade rules.

The EU countered, saying Boeing has benefited from unfair support worth as much as $23 billion -- including a multibillion-dollar agreement with the state of Washington.

Summa sumarum: Both companies are receiving subsidies, but in different shapes. Hardly surprising, given the number of jobs involved and, especially for Boeing and the USA, the national security implications. In my mind Boeing may just have shot themselves in the foot when they went crying to Washington, and at the end of the day neither of the Big Two stand to gain anything from this juvenile war of words.

 

[bocefus]

No one want to listen to BS Wheenie. Firstly, I never said I "wanted" the -380 to be a failure, I am merely opining as many industry experts do who are looking
much further than the aesthetics of the -380. habubuaza is spot on and is one of the few here who realizes the big picture in the Boeing vs Airbus saga more aptly named, the United States of America vs the United States of Europe. You are in left field on your subsidies info, all Boeing and the US are saying is to level the playing field. The US agreed to allow Airbus to receive subsides back in the 70's, to allow the playing field to be leveled as it was dominated by US manufacturers. Things have changed significantly since then and if Airbus is as successful and profitable as they claim, there is no reason for them to receive free financing to launch new aircraft programs. The US will continue to press the subsidies issue and I will bet you 10-1 that EADS/Airbus will relent, as they know they don't have a case once the BS, propaganda and nationalistic hype is eliminated. I will continue to maintain that Boeing builds better aircraft of all competing models than Airbus, better dispatch reliability, lower maintenance, better utilization rates, lower operational costs. Check with Airclaims or just ask any bean counter at an operator that has both brands in their fleets. I say again, the A-380 will be a commercial flop and the only way Airbus will come close to achieving the projected number of "sales" is by their tried and proven method of giving them a way at a cost lower than that which it took to produce.

 

[EuroWheenie]

bofecus

Then why to you continue to sprout BS then?

I will respectfully have to disagree with you. From this side of the salty divide, our understanding of a level playing field, when called for by the US, is one that is heavily biased in favour of the US. We can go on and on about this till the cows come home, and we'll never agree.

Tell you what a level playing field is: Either you withdraw all those N-reg'd aircraft plodding along in the European skies, flying intra-EU, or you open up the domesitic US market to EU carriers. I'm not holding my breath though; FedEx, UPS and ALPA will never allow it to happen.

Your claim that Airbus are giving their metal away is noted; I could readily make the same unfounded claim with regards to the 787 which, it has been allegeded, Boeing are offering at a price lower than the current 767-300, and much lower than the competing A350. Fact of the matter is that neither you nor I are involved in direct negotiations with Airbus or Boeing, and therefore neither of us know what is true and what is BS.

However, buying market share by lowering the price below that of your competitor is not illegal, some might even say it's a sound strategy, and the losses incurrred (if sold below manufacturing costs) may be lower than the gains from after sales service. Since EADS are turning a profit, and has done so for a number of years, their strategy cannot be all wrong. Recent wins by Boeing, most notably the Air Canada one, seems to suggest that Boeing may have taken a leaf off the Airbus book and lowered their prices considerably. Below manufacturing costs? Who knows, but low enough to secure the order and most likely with a service contract that will see the entire deal show a profit, if not on the airframes alone. I see nothing wrong with that, and congratulate Boeing for winning that order.

As for your claim of lower, well everything really, I am unable to reject that, other than saying that you are obviously a more knowledgeable person than 100s of airline executives who's bought Airbusses over the years.

I say again that the A380 will sell in great numbers (rumours of 154 orders/commitments and 100 options are floating) and it will take over the market so far dominated by the Whale. It will be the best thing since sliced bread on a fairly large number of slot restricted routes, and since air travel is only forecast to grow, it will be the answer to the congestion headaches both airlines and airports are suffering from.

I understand that Americans have severe troubles finishing second in a race of two, and this stinks of sour grapes. But, for the moment, you'll have to live with the fact that Airbus is on top and that Boeing is no longer the manufacturer of the biggest passenger aircraft on the market.

The difference between you and me is that you hate Airbus. It may have tricked a lingering inferiority complex, what do I know? But I don't hate Boeing. I'm a European and therefore proud of their accomplishments. But I'm not blind to their fallings, and the A350 is one of them, and I recognise that the B777-300ER is a better machine than the A340-600. In my opinion the 757 is a superior machine compared to the A321, but fact of the matter is that not many airlines need the hot and high capabilities inherent in a 84K lbs thrust machine, not many airlines need transatlantic capability in a 185 seat machine, and not many airlines need a 245K lbs MTOW. What many airlines need is to transport 185 pax over short to medium range and doing it as cheap as possible. Hence the A321 is still being made, and the 757 is not. It breaks my heart, but there you have it - the market has spoken. However, I have no dislike of Boeing and I have never said anything bad about a Boeing product. I wish both manufacturers the best, but if Airbus could retain the upperhand that obviously would suit me just fine. Should Boeing edge ahead, and recent sales success seems to prove that they are, then more power to their elbow!

 

[bocefus]

Disagree all you like, your understanding of the subsidies issue apparently comes from the Airbus website.. Care to explain exactly how it is heavily biased in favor of Boeing?
And please be more creative than, “Boeing gets big government contracts and that is a subsidy” We are talking direct versus indirect subsidies. Boeing gets, indirect subsidies, Airbus gets both.
Boeing is a defense contractor with an aircraft manufacturing company as one of its business units, just like EADS, with Airbus as a business unit. In 2004 EADS had sales of 60.2 billion versus 50 billion for Boeing, EADS also claims that their defense order book now exceeds that of Boeing. The government has no ownership in Boeing unlike Airbus in which government is the majority owner. Airbus is a jobs program for Europe subsidized by the taxpayers at outlandish tax rates. The propaganda being spouted by EADS/Airbus is essential in order for them to feel like they are getting their euros worth.
Race of two? Americans have no problems with Airbus claiming market share, and you are correct, nothing illegal about giving product away at a loss in order to claim that. Airbus can afford to do that as they receive both direct and indirect subsidies. Boeing does not and will not sell aircraft at a loss as they are responsible to their shareholders who expect profits, not market share data. 100s of airline executives who bought Airbusses? That is quite another story, I’d “buy” one too if they gave it to me and let them use me to claim market share.