Posted on 06/17/2007 12:07:05 PM PDT by lowbuck
Louis Gallois, chief executive of Airbus, is to launch an urgent effort at the Paris air show, which opens on Monday, to keep the struggling group’s €10bn development of its A350 family of long-range jets on track.
He is to hold talks with Steven Udvar Hazy, chief executive of ILFC, one of the world’s top two aircraft leasing companies and one of the world’s most influential buyers of aircraft, to try to overcome the serious doubts Mr Udvar-Hazy has again expressed about the design choices Airbus has made for the A350.
The aircraft is crucial to the group’s plans for recovery.
Mr Gallois and Tom Enders, French and German co-chief executives of EADS, the Airbus parent company, also issued another plea at the weekend to the group’s Franco-German shareholders for reform of the group’s corporate governance structure.
Mr Gallois said EADS should become “a more normal company, where governments have legitimate interests but don’t interfere in management decisions. We want the governance of an integrated company not a joint venture.”
Ahead of an expected meeting next month between French president Nicolas Sarkozy and German chancellor Angela Merkel to discuss the crisis and restructuring at Airbus, Mr Enders said there was “clearly a tension between a truly international company and the national mandates of governments”. This was “sometimes reflected in the fissures and discussions we have in the company”.
Mr Gallois said he was “encouraged” that Mr Sarkozy had said that one day the French state could give up its 15 per cent stake in EADS.
Both executives believed it would be better for the group to have one chief executive and one chairman, said Mr Enders. “But we must be patient. This is not the time for the shareholders. They stick to the present structure.”
Mr Udvar-Hazy’s outspoken criticisms about earlier proposed versions of the A350 have forced Airbus to make embarrassing and time-consuming improvements to its design.
The competition between the A350 and its highly successful Boeing rival the 787 Dreamliner, which is five years ahead and is due to enter commercial service next May ahead of the A350 in 2013, is expected to dominate the orders battle in Paris this week.
ILFC itself is expected to announce an order this week for 50 more Boeing 787s and a possible order for 30 could be placed by Qatar Airways. The Middle East carrier recently signed a memorandum of understanding with Airbus for 80 A350s to become the launch customer, and a final firm agreement for this order could be signed this week.
rather than the one-piece composite barrel fuselage sections adopted by Boeing.
“We are definitely sticking to that,” said Mr Gallois. “We will meet Mr Udvar-Hazy and try to convince him this approach is prudent, economic and efficient. Steve is the most important purchaser of aircraft in the world. I respect his opinions, but I will try to convince him we have made the right choice.”
Mr Gallois was also forced to defend the level of maturity of the A350 design against Jim McNerney, Boeing’s chief executive, who touched a nerve in a French newspaper interview by suggesting that airlines were still uncertain about the final configuration of the jet.
“It is completely unfair to say that,” said Mr Gallois. Finnair, Aer Lingus and Qatar Airways were already placing firm orders. “The aircraft is completely defined. Customers know it.”
He added: “We are at the stage we can guarantee performance. We are not changing the design ... What Mr McNerney said is wrong.”
The first 787 is due to roll out of the Boeing assembly plant in Seattle in three weeks’ time with its first flight expected in September and its entry into commercial service next May.
Scott Carson, chief executive of Boeing’s commercial aircraft division, said on Sunday the programme was on track and was already the most successful launch in the history of the aviation industry with 584 firm orders from 45 customers.
On the eve of the air show, both Boeing and Airbus said the aerospace trading cycle remained strong, in spite of record orders in the past two years. Orders in particular from US and European network carriers would support the market. Mr Carson said 787 production slots for new airline customers were sold out to 2015.
That, ,my fellow FReepers, is the fatal flaw in this design. Carbon fiber and aluinium are (IMHO) not compatable for expansion/retraction in flight cycles.
I am beginning to believe that Airbag is totally hosed and in addition to loosing it arse on the 380 will lose the game on the 350.
Now if Boeing goes plastic on the NG 737 they are really in trouble.
Comments/Thoughts.
““a more normal company, where governments have legitimate interests but don’t interfere in management decisions.’
We want taxpayer money, but to run the company as we see fit.
Taxation without representation is just an American paranoia.
Airbus probably should write off doing another version of the 350 and try to beat Boeing to the punch with an up to date plane in the 320 - 737 range.
They do that and they surrender the widebody commercial aircraft industry to Boeing for 20 years or more. Your talking about 1 to 2 trillion dollars in lost business and 100’s of billions in lost profits. Those widebody aircraft generate the big profit margins. While its the sensible thing to do given how badly they have screwed themselves by building the A380, Euro pride will never allow that.
Airbust has no choice but to build the A350, even if it doesn’t sell much. They will find back channel ways to fund the project via subsidies. Airbust is a european job creation program first, a commercial aircraft builder second. Its the way its always been.
The differential expansion issue is no small issue to me, a consumer of flight services.
I think Jaguar, several years back, had the same issue: aluminum engines, IIRC, and some other alloys for certain other parts connected to the engine. Differential expansion at operating temperatures made for a poorly functioning engine.
I am not an expert here by any means, but an airframe that has the slightest issue with this is not one I would fly in. Didn’t the 1950s British aircraft industry tank with its Cosmo (not sure on the name) because the aircraft cycled many flights and developed airframe problems — resulting in large loss of life?
Didn’t the 1950s British aircraft industry tank with its Cosmo (not sure on the name) because the aircraft cycled many flights and developed airframe problems — resulting in large loss of life?
************************************
That was the DeHaveland Comet ... In addition to being a difficult aircraft to maintain with it’s engines buried in the wings , it suffered a series of explosive decompression airframe failures due to cracks developing in the skin round the windows which were rectangular and presented stress points at the corners instead of the oval rounded windows used by Boeing and others who had experience with high altitude pressurized aircraft beginning with the B29 and going forward...
In my opinion going with composite panels in an aluminum frame makes for a maintenance nightmare (remember these are the people that glue on the tail/empennage on their smaller models) and will only make whatever small number of planes they do build less valuable as scrap to the aluminum smelters.
Thanks for correcting/filling that in re the Comet. The more I learn, including that some of the smaller craft have glued on tails, the more I see the engineers are not in charge at Airbus. Jobs and politics first, passenger safety somewhere down the list.
You are assuming that they will make a profit on their widebodies. Certainly, they are unlikely to ever break even on the 380. As to the 350, current sales numbers suggest that they are unlikely to make a profit on that plane in the near future.
Remember, Lockheed screwed up on the initial Electra. By the time they got that right, they lost out on the first and second generation jets. They managed to come back with a solid design on the 1011 (although they almost bankrupted the company), but they were essentially out of the commercial aircraft market because they spent so much effort on the Electra. The 350, if pursued, may well do the same for Airbus -- by the time they get it right, they'll be too far behind the curve to compete for the 737/320 replacements.
Error-Bus needs to just go under soon.
This is a good example of what the EU can do.
Ditto for the Chevrolet Vega in the '70s and Buick and Oldsmobile compacts in the '60s. Aluminum reuqires expensive high-tech solutions to work in hot environments.
I'm afraid that Boeing will try to go after a plastic 777 next in order to compete with the A350-1000, which would be a mistake in my opinion.
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.