Posted on 02/23/2007 7:18:21 AM PST by FreeManWhoCan
From:http://www.avionnewspaper.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=545e468b-c60d-4f4f-b626-22d27461edfb
The A380's wiring problems include the wiring of in-flight entertainment, like audio and video signals, to televisions and headphone jacks. Boeing's aircraft, besides claiming to have a fifth as much wiring as the inside of the A380, will use a Wi-Fi system to distribute the entertainment to different people.
This is the first I've heard that the 787 was thinking of using WIFI. Now you say they're dropped that idea? Probably a good idea to NOT use WIFI.
I'm sure Madam Pelosi would like one.
"It looks like everyone is abandoning this flying titanic."
Are there enough lifeboats for everyone?
Actually, the Boeing 707, 727, and 747 were all "bet the company" decisions.
Boeing funded, designed, and built the jet transport prototype (the Boeing 367-80) on its own, then shopped it to both the airlines and to the Air Force.
The KC-135 was an unsolicited proposal.
You have to learn to ignore Alter Kaker, he lives in an alternate universe, where socialism wins every time.
I seriously doubt that the 380 issues were limited to an entertainment system. Their problems were said to arisse from designing/building harnesses at different associate sites (countries) without bothering to check to be sure the design software etc. were compatible. Since they used the same basic tools they 'should have been OK'.
At least that's the story I came away with.
I'm sure that Illinois and Missouri are providing nice packages for additional business but that's a far cry from EADS' direct national involvement.
I expect the west coast to be very lean in major aerospace business before too long.
On the other hand, if Airbus cannot deliver the jobs and local income for each of the parties, I'd look forward to severe upheaval and continued failure to perform.
What on earth are you talking about? In what way am I a socialist?
This is the height of stupidity. If you think I'm supporting subsidies, you're nuts.
While that's true, the 787 is primarily manufcatured in Washington. The State of Washington provides a tax subsidy of approximately $4 billion / year related directly to the number of 787s Boeing produces in the state. That's a direct government subsidy, and is by no means less problematic than the socialism of the Europeans.
You seem to support shoddily built aircraft from socialist countries, where they heavily subsidise their monopoly industry to make it appear that they can conpete with those built in free nations.
A "tax subsidy" huh? I knew you were a socialist. You sound just like the congressional democrats, demanding that we 'pay for' tax cuts. A reduction in taxes for the major source of revenue in the state is by no means a subsidy. It is in reality a path to greater revenue through growth in industries that support the state. Have you ever read Laffer?
This is one of the most asinine things I have ever read.
1. Airbuses aren't shoddy. If they were, nobody would buy their aircraft. Nor would they be approved by the FAA and every other regulatory body in the world. Your argument is utterly ridiculous.
2. Ok, ok, Europeans are socialists because they subsidize their aircraft industry. You're right and I agree. Socialists in the US do the exact same thing. Nobody should subsidize any aircraft industry, but they do, and that's a fact. I don't like it, and I'm still unsure of why you're calling me names. It reflects poorly on your character and intelligence.
3. Monopoly industry? What the hell do you take Boeing for, chopped liver?
You are aware for instance that Air France, one of the largest purchasers of Airbus products, nevertheless operates 40 Boeing 747s, and 41 777s? KLM, is even more Boeing dependent... Something 90% of its 100+ active fleet aircraft are Boeing made... Lufthansa operates 61 737s and 30 747s... so where's the monopoly, other than inside your head?
I suggest that we nominate ole "Jake The Goose" as our point man to beta test the A380. Heck, being that he is a goose anyway, maybe he should just fly along side the A380 and thereby can provide an on the scene report when the wings fall off. I know that not being a goose, I do not plan to fly this plane for a loooong time.... go goose go....
And you, my friend, are an idiot. Washington's tax credit per plane built is clearly a direct subsidy, and it's marketed as such. You're really not worth my time. If you care to read up on the controversy at the WTO involving Washington's Boeing Subsidy, you're welcome to do so. If not, your loss.
I hope you know where you can stuff your WTO, and every other Globalist/socialist tyrant agency. You must be another U.N. citizen, like sKerry and Albore?
"so where's the monopoly" Try all over Europe. No other company will be allowed to spring up. Error Busses are all poorly disguised copies of Boeing 737/757 designs. If they didn't look just like 737s, nobody would be willing to risk their lives in them.
Boeings leadership is due to consistently superior design and quality.
Like I said, you're an idiot.
You must be another U.N. citizen, like sKerry and Albore?
See above.
"so where's the monopoly" Try all over Europe. No other company will be allowed to spring up.
And yet Boeing competes succesfully in Europe. Out of curiosity, how many civilian competitors does Boeing have in the States? Oh right, zero. You are an arguer in search of an argument.
Error Busses are all poorly disguised copies of Boeing 737/757 designs.
I can only assume that you're not in the aerospace industry, given the idiocy of that comment. Is there anything you're (a) knowledgeable about or (b) right on? I hold out hope.
OK,
You are mixing apples and Orangutans.
Washington State (province) and the State of Illinois (province) DO offer incentives to do business in those states. These are incentives to bring business into, or retain business in their states. Business that will, with success, bring jobs and money into the community.
This in contrast to EADS having been set up by a coven of eurostates and funded - for production, development, marketing, and 'competition' - by those same states.
If Boeing were not capable of selling planes at a profit incentives would never be offered.
Airbus could lose money on every sale and it would be shored up, they could be encouraged to design an oversized, unwanted, and obsolete, monster, fail to get it right after having sold several at discount, be limited to a very few major hubs, and still be subsidized by various governments in order to simply keep going.
As to Boeing being a monopoly - the feds should never have approved the Boeing Macdonnell Douglas merger when it was clear that Lockeed and others were gone from the market.
But they did.
It is likely in any event that MacDac would have found some other way to self destruct had the merger not gone through. And, that would have left us with a single transport manufacturer just the same.
Have you noticed that you're all alone out on your globalist/socialist limb?
How do you liberals find your way here? You stand out like a sore toe.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.