Will Airbus delay mean much? (A380's postponement might aid Boeing, might not)

Associated Press via the Corvallis Gazette-Times ^ | Tuesday, June 7, 2005 | ELIZABETH M. GILLESPIE

[sam_paine]

... without jeopardizing the airworthiness of the A-380.

Too late!

[pissant]

I see Airbus is going to make a plane to compete with the 787. Which is funny because they said they already had models to compete when Boeing launched it!

[Paradox]

The majority of posters to the Airbus threads are heavily biased against it. I understand why, but it does detract in general from the quality of post and information that is given in them. Its just one of those things..

There is at least one member who posts some pretty informative articles in these threads sometimes (Central Scrutinizer?).

As for myself, I like for people and companies to dream big. While I am not the biggest fan of Airbus, I do want to see large projects succeed, in general. I believe this beast will eventually fly and be minimally profitable for Airbus, not that profitability matters much to them..

[Paleo Conservative]

The first 747 prototype is loaned out to a museum now ( I wished the Smithsonian - Air&Space Museum would have gotten it).

It was used to flight test the PW and RR engines for the 777, and it has been used by Boeing for flight testing various other equipemnt.

[Paleo Conservative]

You might be right about the 777 , but, at least one of the new program or new airplane design is sacrificed ( take one for the team ) is tested for fatigue and broken into pieces.

I don't think the ones used for fatigue tests ever were fitted out with a flight deck or interior. There's one test where they measure how much force it takes to break the wings, and another one where they put the fuselage in a water tank and simulate tens or hundreds of thousands of pressurization cycles till the hull fails due to metal fatigue.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Wrong, all the planes built will go into service, there is no prototype. The second will not be broken into pieces. I don't know where you get your information from, but its not from any knowledge of airplanes.

Airbus will be doing flight testing on the first 5 planes, they are all the same, no prototype. 2500 hours of flights, with one plane engined with GE/PW GP7200 engines, and the others with the Rolls Royce Trent 900 engines.

First plane goes to Singapore airlines, and will be in service in the last quarter of 2006. Good article about the first flight and testing program in this month's Air Transport World.

As for the name calling of Airbus, pretty childish.

[Central Scrutiniser]

The first 777 ever built is still flying for its original customer, United Airlines.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Thanks for the ping, the bias here is silly and misinformed. Its OK to bag on the French, but to carry it to an airplane that is built by a consortium of countries and carries a hell of a lot of American built parts is stupid.

Airbus makes good planes, Boeing makes good planes, Embraer makes good planes, they all compete and make each other better. My airline is going to be the launch customer of the A350, should be fun.

The A380 is a niche plane, they aren't being built to service every route in the world, just medium long range high density routes. The plane is being built primarily for the needs of Asian carriers that operate from slot controlled airports and for Middle Eastern carriers that can afford to outfit their cabins with extravagance that their customers will pay for. And it will be a hell of a good cargo plane. The A380 may not make a profit for a while, but hats off to Airbus for pushing the envelope and building it. Airbus makes its dough from the A318/319/320/330/340 aircraft.

[sheik yerbouty]

Hopefully Boeing will win out..

[Citizen of the Savage Nation]

Be aware that much of the derision that Airbus gets here is due to the fact that the company has grown cocky and arrogant over the past few years, as if the company does no wrong and offers the best planes for every market and every customer. Reminds me of Japan in the early 90's, right before their economy tanked. Therefore, if they lose an order, its because Boeing 'cheated' somehow, factors other than 'economics' were involved, yadda yadda. Pot, kettle anyone? This business with AI is just freaking hilarious, and now they send a letter to the Japanese govt complaining about the lack of Airbus sales there?

If Boeing pulled this crap, they would get the same reaction. They need to realize the 777 and 787 are damn good planes that are superior to most of their offerings for the markets that these airlines are buying for right now, that's why they are getting their asses handed to them lately.

[hattend]

"There is no doubt that we will meet the performance specs we promised our customers,'' she said. "That's not a concern.''

That's not the concern, Mary Anne. It's "when". Customers want their planes with the performance promised in a reasonable amount of time.

[kidd]

If the A380 development was funded with private money and provided competition for Boeing, I would not criticize it. I would still favor Boeing, because in my opinion the development of the 747 is one of the greatest capitalism success stories.

Instead, the A380 development was subsidized with a seemingly bottomless pocket of public funds, with the goal of putting Boeing out of business.

I am all for competition - it creates better, cheaper products. My dislike of the A380 has nothing to do with product quality.

[Octar]

This has to be the dumbest airplane since the the Spruce Goose. 800+ passengers? How about we try for a plane that carries 8000 or 80000?
Why would these clowns expect that airports would be eager to add to their current debt so they can extend and re-enforce their runways, upgrade their boarding and departing systems, and the rest of the infrastructure needed to support such a sudden and foolish addition to the problems they already have?

[Prophet in the wilderness]

ahhh ? guess what ? I got my information from a BOOK about the planes being broken i.e. the wings snapped in half from fatigue test.
Name calling of AirRUST ? SO WHAT !!!

[Central Scrutiniser]

Ahhhh, guess what? I get my information from having been in the industry and subscribing to the trade journals and magazines!

You are a buffoon.

[Central Scrutiniser]

Boeing gets its share of government cheese, don't be naive.

[Prophet in the wilderness]

Yea..... look who is doing the name calling now.
Look who is being childish now.

[Central Scrutiniser]

I speak from experience, I know a bit about planes. You just know how to make really stupid names for Airbus.

Stick to whatever it is that you know and comment on that.

[Central Scrutiniser]

The new Smithsonian Air and Space Annex at Dulles has the prototype 707 on display, its gone through all kinds of mods since day one, it looks great. They also have a Concorde and the only remaining Stratoliner.

Wish they had the surviving XB-70 on display, but its at Wright Patterson.

[Paleo Conservative]

They also have a Concorde and the only remaining Stratoliner.

I wonder why Boeing didn't get more market share with the 247 and Stratoliner? It seems like until the 707, Boeing was always the underdog when competing for comercial airliners. Weren't the Stratoliners mostly used for transporting generals and other VIP's across the Atlantic during WWII?