More A380 Problems

[Clive]

This news overnight could eventually lead to the demise of Airbus, in my humble opinion. I have heard that the wiring problems are the easy things to fix. What about the cracking undercarriage and the over weight issues. :rolleyes:

Kinda glad I'm a boeing boy actually. I'd choose the old "Bentley" of the sky over the "Hyundai" of the sky anyday. Now I just have to work on my own over weight issues and I'll be in the industry longer than Airbus (damn that boeing belly syndrome!) :}

"Airbus parent EADS has pushed back its troubled A380 superjumbo by another year and issued a new profit warning, infuriating airlines such as Qantas and top buyer Emirates, which has put its purchases under review.

Qantas has ordered 12 A380s, with an option to buy 10 more.

But the world's largest jetliner is now running two years late, due mainly to difficulties installing wiring.

The new delays, coupled with a further 2.8 billion euros ($A4.8 billion) in profit shortfalls on top of 2 billion euros announced in June, have put a huge dent in Europe's efforts to triumph over Boeing and its ageing 747 jumbo.

It marks the first time that Airbus has acknowledged it will not be able to deliver the first $A403.9 million double-decker to launch customer Singapore Airlines this year, with the inaugural delivery now set for October 2007 - 10 months overdue.

In an unprecedented move for the Franco-German-led company, EADS has completely withdrawn its earnings guidance for 2006."

[Syd eng]

This could be the end of the A380. Heard a quote the other day that "the A380 will become the new MD-11. A great Freighter!"

[Fliegenmong]

History is littered with the detritus of failed projects, the Princess Flying Boat, the Brabazon, TU154 - (ok some success there - but not in any meaningful commercial sense) - many others - I do hope it comes off for Airbus, it would be a very sad thing to see a project like this ultimatley fail. :{ - (I am fond of both manufacturers so don't read anything into that!!)

I did at least witness (along with my Son) the first ever landing on Aust soil at Brisbane last November, and recorded it - that's a 'nioce' bit of History to look back on if anything else....:) - something my Son can tell his kids etc etc:)

[Contract Con]

Gday,

I think "The White Elephant" is gradually turning a lighter shade of pale!

Dump your order while you can:sad:

Cheers,

Con:ok:

[Syd eng]

Will be only a matter of time before the cancellations start. Tipping Emirates to be the 1st.

[Syd eng]

SYDNEY, 4 October 2006: The Chief Financial Officer of Qantas, Mr Peter Gregg, said
today Qantas understood from discussions with Airbus that it would not receive its first
A380 aircraft until August 2008, around two years late.
“We expect to have four aircraft by the end of 2008 and seven by mid-2009,” Mr Gregg
said, “which we understand maintains the original delivery schedule with the other two
launch airlines.”
Mr Gregg said Qantas was disappointed with the delay and had commenced a review of
its capacity needs in light of the revised timetable from Airbus.
He said Qantas was satisfied that the delay was due to production problems at Airbus and
not technical issues with the aircraft.
QANTAS STATEMENT ON A380 DELAY
Issued by Qantas Corporate Communication (Q3487)
Media Inquiries: Belinda de Rome - Telephone 02 9691 3762

[DutchRoll]

Wow! What a surprise!:eek:

Assurances from major manufacturers are meaningless and always have been. I'm a bit surprised that Dixon, Gregg & the likes keep naively quoting Airbus's assurances as if they're gospel. Actually, on second thoughts, no I'm not.

[ccy sam]

Now lets if see Boeing can deliver the 787, with all it's new technology, on time!!!!!

[Keg]

Boeing don't have to deliver the 787 on time. They just need to not let it run as late as the A380 and their credibility will still be better than that of Airbus! :E

[Spotlight]

The BIG LIE is so seductive to certain types.

" Qantas is satisfied that the delay was due to production problems at Airbus and not technical issues with the aircraft".

Believe that and you will believe anything. How does a person like this see his job?

[chemical alli]

so what a surprize the 380 has been delayed again, who wants bets on this won't be the last.but not to rite off airbus ,have also heard the 787 fuselage is cracking,something about glare and plastic.bring on the 747x i say trusty beast same seat per klm pay and range better built and a garranteed job for all.myself, personally always wanted to see the boeing sonic cruiser nice bit of kit out of a thunderbird movie :8

[Arm out the window]

Spotlight, what else would you expect anyone in his position to say?
'We've got no confidence in the bucket of ****, and it's probably going to fall in a heap?'
Great move for all the companies involved if he did that.

[Taildragger67]

Isn't it the situation that 'technical issues' have caused the 'production problems'? :ugh:

It'll be fun to see how much the 'bus have to pay our friends in Dubai not to tin at least some of their orders and how that'll be hidden in EADS's accounts...

I expect some City analysts will be crawling all over this.

So 2010 when production 'ramps up'... and when is 748 production expected to 'ramp up'?

[Shitsu_Tonka]

Anyone who reads my posts (fools!) knows that I have always thought the A380 was 20 years too late - however, do not forget that Boeing came very close to bankruptcy when they developed the B747 back in the 60's.

An engineering feat of this magnitude requires deep pockets - both in financial terms and patience. Another reason it is probably a white elephant is simply the way the airline industry is financially geared these days - and the types of people running them. Back in the 50's 60's and 70's, there were real aviation pioneers running airlines. Now, for better or for worse, there are shifty accountant types who don't have much in the way of an understanding or interest in aviation - simply making profits.

I hope it is a success - nobody who frequents these forums is going to benefit from it's failure.

[Led Zep]

History is littered with the detritus of failed projects...TU154 - (ok some success there - but not in any meaningful commercial sense)


With around 900 TU-154s built it would be fair to say that it was a commercial success! :}
I think you meant TU-144. ;)

[Mobi LAME]

Does all this mean that because the bright new shiny planes we expected to have are going to be a bit late, we are going to have to maintain the slightly older duller planes that we no longer expected to have, with people that we no longer have?

[Contract Con]

Its OK Mobi, they will be maintained in India, in the hangar next door to the I.T Hangar:}

I am very much pro Boeing, and do believe that Airbus have missed the mark with "The White Elephant", however, can anyone old enough to remember tell me how late the Jumbo was with its initial deliveries.

I know there were a few issues with it too.

Just wondering what the time frame was. Months or years?

Cheers,

Con:ok:

P.s As mentioned earlier, it will be a great freighter!

[Syd eng]

Well with the Jumbo, QANTAS waited some time before it jumped in and did not get the initial (100 series)ones they hung back until the 200B's were released. I guess it is a bit like the way a series 2 car has all the bugs ironed out that were in the inital model.

[DutchRoll]

Boeing went to the very brink of bankruptcy with the 747 due to problems with the development of the JT9D engine, which delayed it about a year (around 30 production aircraft at one point sitting on the tarmac with nowhere to go). They had invested massive amounts of money in the new production plant. It wasn't just the original jumbo either. The 747-400 had fairly significant teething troubles when it came out too, being the conversion of an all-analogue aeroplane to a mostly-digital one.

I hope airbus gets up too. Aviation history is littered with accounts of 'revolutionary' new types running into big delays and initial problems. I'm still amazed that airlines don't automatically add 3-5 years onto the manufacturers proposed delivery date when they order them to get an accurate estimate of when they'll be reliably making revenue. Airline management have learned absolutely nothing in 75 years!

[Fliegenmong]

Thank you Led Zep - I did indeed :\

[HotDog]

It's nice to see that this thread has not de-generated into the usual Schadenfreude whenever any Airbus mishap emerges. The generally pragmatic response shows that the A380 will not become a white elephant.

[ruprecht]

Does anyone else think that Boeing must have come to Qantas and said:

"Tell you what, you pull out of this A-380 deal and you can be a launch customer for the 747-8 in 2010. You already operate the 400 so there should be minimal infrastructure changes required. In the meantime, you can replace around 10-12 of your older 400's with some 777's at a bargain price."

ruprecht.

[HotDog]

I doubt it ruprecht, as Airbus will have to pay heavy penalties for the delayed deliveries, I'm sure that terminating the order would incur a high premium as well.

[Redstone]

The die is cast.

The interesting thing will be to see how the game plays out. In of itself the concept is a good one, it's just that a machine of the 380s proportions brings new challenges that, although customers do their best to prepere, are largely a venture into un charted teritory.

The key will be if the beast is capable of what Airbus has promised.

[Chimbu chuckles]

How long before the airports who have spent huge to prepare for A380 get in on the 'compensation' game?

A380 won't be allowed to 'fail' because EADS is a govt instrumentality...and EU public service mentality/practices is the problem...but will it be a success?

That is entirely a different question.

[Mobi LAME]

Wasn't one of Reg Ansett's great sayings...."Never be a launch customer, let somebody else sort the problems out and then buy." Mind you Sir Peter didn't heed those words with the F-50 and A-320.

[Taildragger67]

Well with the Jumbo, QANTAS waited some time before it jumped in and did not get the initial (100 series)ones they hung back until the 200B's were released. I guess it is a bit like the way a series 2 car has all the bugs ironed out that were in the inital model.

Yeah but they were still a launch customer with initial orders placed before the first flight and a nice little Rat painted on the nose of the prototype when rolled out at Everett.

Originally Posted by Mobi LAME
Wasn't one of Reg Ansett's great sayings...."Never be a launch customer, let somebody else sort the problems out and then buy." Mind you Sir Peter didn't heed those words with the F-50 and A-320.
There was a PPRuNer of yore whose signature was "Never fly the 'A' model of anything"

Ruprecht... not beyond the realms of imagination, mate. Remiss of them if they hadn't been all over Coward St.

[VH-Cheer Up]

Have a look a long way down this page:
http://thetravelinsider.info/2006/email1006.htm

The writer seems to think Airbus is in for a spot of financial turbulence ahead.

The USD/Euro argument probably holds water. But is EK really likely to dump A380 orders and options and switch to the 747-8?

Seems unlikely...

[woftam]

And Rolls Royce have downed tools on the Trent 900 for twelve months. Maybe they see more problems ahead for the A380 program? :eek:

[ACMS]

Ya gotta laugh. I new this would happen.

Big white ugly piece of sh**


It would make a nice artificial reef though,,,,or a nice McDonalds rest,,,,,,,,,,,or a nice kiddies play area.

Anymore suggestions what EADS could do with the thing?

"if it's not Boeing"

[HotDog]

Ya gotta laugh. I new this would happen.


I suppose you (sic) new the 747 was two years late as well which nearly sent Boeing to the wall.:rolleyes:

[Led Zep]

IIRC though, Boeing poured all its own money into developing the 747 as a commercial airliner after it lost a US millitary bid for a heavy airlifter, won by the C-5. Airbus as a consortium, would have a hell of a lot more resources to put towards the A380 then what Boeing did with the 747?

[Shitsu_Tonka]

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=246942

[ACMS]

Hot Dog.

As a matter of fact I did. Many times on PPrune I wrote that the bus would never be deliverd on time and in spec.

I wasn't more than 7 years old when Boeing rolled the 747 out so I can't comment.However I do seem to recall a lot of the problems were not the Airframe but the Engines, ring a bell Hot dog.

I spend a huge amount of time and money in Airbus products and know the guys who fly them pretty well. The A340-600 mess is another case in point.

Read my lips "AIRBUS HAVE NEVER EVER IN THE HISTORY OF AVIATION DELIVERED AN AIRCRAFT ON TIME/BUDGET/OR ........SPEC."

Rant over.




"if it's not Boeing.........."

[HotDog]

ACMS, strange that Airbus has out sold Boeing of late. Those customers obviously don't share your expert opinions on aeroplanes.:sad:

[ACMS]

Hot Dog, no mate it's the bean counters that don't share my opinion.
The "customers" like Crew, Engineers and Pax don't much like
them either.
The Bean counters love them because they are cheap in the short term.
You can buy 3 A330's for 2 777's. That is why Airbus sold as many as they have.
Ask anyone at QF how much they paid for the A330's,they will tell you Airbus basically gave them away at a huge loss just to secure the A380 sale and have more of their jets downunder.
I've been a professional in this industry for 20+ years, I see what goes on. My time in Asia ain't been wasted.:ok:
cheers

[soldier of fortune]

quote -mobi lame
"Wasn't one of Reg Ansett's great sayings...."Never be a launch customer, let somebody else sort the problems out and then buy." Mind you Sir Peter didn't heed those words with the F-50 and A-320"

ah yes -the old fokker F-50 -now that realy brings a tear to my old crusty eyes- dam that aircraft helped pay my house off back in 80s and early 90s
thank you - peter :D :D :D

duty engineer 1987
" we need you to come in today we have a prop change on a fokker in the hanger"

me
" i'll take that 12 hours ot"
once again thanks peter

[Pete Conrad]

Boeing is an engineering company...Airbus is a marketing company.

[HotDog]

My time in Asia ain't been wasted.

Nor has my 40 odd years in aviaton been wasted ACSM. We are all entitled to our opinions; time will tell.

Cheers HD.

[Modest Pilot]

LAME mate of my just returned from the Sand Pit. Rumor there is that the A380 the wing box again failed to test; made just over 3 G; has to make around 3.75 G. Any truth or just Hot Desert Air?

[Chimbu chuckles]

FWIW Have recently heard that the 'wiring problem' is more along the lines of a major design fault than a simple problem...combined with RR stopping work on the Trent 900 and what are the chances this will not be the last set back for the Dugong?

As far as I am aware Airbus managed to sell more airframes than Boeing last year and that is it...Boeing, with the 777 and 787, have once again regained first spot because they build a better product...The view that Airbus aircraft are less than fantastic is a view too widely held by pilots and engineers world wide to be all put down to francophobia.

On the one hand I would say 'loss of face' issues within EADS (German and French Govt backing) will ensure A380 eventually 'succeeds'...but at what cost?

A340 has been long held in contempt, A350 has big problems, A380 has to be viewed as a major problem...and all while Boeing sets the world on fire with 777 and with 787, 748 in the wings riding on Boeing's well known reputation for delivering aeroplanes that are 'just a little better' than advertised I would suggest EADS is in extremely deep ****e.

Airbus pilot's Stockholm Syndrome symptoms not withstanding:ok:

[Led Zep]

On the one hand I would say 'loss of face' issues within EADS (German and French Govt backing) will ensure A380 eventually 'succeeds'...but at what cost?


Guess we had better ask the French pollies how much it cost to ensure the Mercure "succeeded". :}

[Capn Bloggs]

Mind you Sir Peter didn't heed those words with the F-50 and A-320.
Well, he was a truck driver...

[Kanga767]

The Dassault Mercure did succeed. It's called an A320. :O


K

[Taildragger67]

ACMS, strange that Airbus has out sold Boeing of late. Those customers obviously don't share your expert opinions on aeroplanes.:sad:

I'd take a giveaway... Much analysis a few years back that Boeing were losing orders as they weren't prepared to match the discounts coming out of Toulouse; they'd tried it for a couple of years and were eroding shareholder value (less of an issue for government-sponsored enterprises).

There's also the political aspect. Boeing didn't sell diddly in the Middle East for a few years as Dubya started raining ordnance on the place and les Frogs railed against it (and I'm making no comment either way on that here); also notice that our friends to the north/east make a point of balancing their orders between the two.

Currency aspects have also been a fairly big factor; a few years ago, EADS were able to sell anything denominated in USD, pretty cheaply and still have good margins when translated back to EUR; now the boot's on the other foot and the company which took the reorganisational pain which had been forced upon it, is now in the better competitive position.

Airbus won't 'go under'; it won't be allowed to. And it's not in airlines' interests for it to do so. What they do need to do, is realise that maybe there are better managers on the planet than those spat out of les grandes ecoles and widen the search remit a bit. Or give Leahy a shot at the top spot.

[ACMS]

I'm back
I was banned for 2 days to "cool off"????
Gee I guess the Moderator must be an Airbus driver? thin skinned perhaps?
I don't recall saying anything remotely bad, only that the 380 is a dog and i knew it would be late, Airbus make cheap planes and that I've been Flying for 20+ years and haven't wasted my time in Asia.
For that I get banned for 2 days???????????????????????
And the moderator allows a discussion on AFL football????????
go figure !!:{


Mr Moderator you can give me your apology anytime...............I'm waiting.............although not holding my breath.

[Contract Con]

ACMS,

I'm with you on 2 counts,

It is a "White Elephant", nuf said

and

the post re the AFL! I remember recently a grumble/directive from the top that all items in D & G Reprting points were to be of relevent aviation news:confused: :confused:

Anyway, thats my waste of bandwidth for this evening,

Con:ok:

[Fliegenmong]

OK - I'll light a fuse and walk out, I'll come back later if not banned and see how the pot was stirred.

Nah better not...........















(mumbling something about centre wing tank explosions):E :}

[chemical alli]

so the a380 is late again no big deal.eads will survive and all those lames layed off will be begged to return .history will repeat itself,that you can be sure off ,:\ like flaired pants and big collars the lames will grow fat on the ot once this aircraft enters service even if you are working in and mro in china

[DutchRoll]

Whether or not Boeing produces better performing airframes than Airbus is pretty much irrelevant.

Airbus sells them cheap. And cheap is what airline bean-counters and CEOs of today want. They couldn't tell a rivet from a screw from a nail. They don't look much further into the future than next year's profit projection and their productivity bonus. On that basis alone, coupled with propping up from European governments (though seriously guys, the US is not exactly a beacon of light shining against industry protectionism) Airbus will probably be around for a while.

[ACMS]

OK - I'll light a fuse and walk out, I'll come back later if not banned and see how the pot was stirred.
Nah better not...........
Are you suggesting I lied about being "banned" for 2 days?
You'd better ask our moderator.
Nice to feel the trust in here.:ouch:

[Fliegenmong]

Oh No! not at all ACMS!!, not at all, there is much discussion re the banning of some and not of others, some topics ok some not whatever, I've no doubt you were banned ,

(just going to ask about centre wing tank explosions or I suppose the apparent lack thereof on Airbus A/C, but you know all too often topics nose dive into the A vs B slinging matches and it was irresponsible of me to even make the comment)

[Clive]

Oh come on Fliegenmong.... let's go!

Maybe just a round or 2. :)

I'd still put my old Bentley up against your fresh new Hyundai any day. :E

Even a Porsche will overheat sometimes and a Jag needs a trailer of spares hitched to the towbar to keep it going, but they are all timeless, tried and true.

Once my daughters Hyundai has its ashtray full it'll be time to replace it.

I'll grant Chemical Ali his dues. The overtime for LAMEs will always be a dead cert on the Hyundai of the sky.

Am I being too harsh? :}

[Fliegenmong]

Oh good lord no Clive, not too harsh. :) :D
He He - shouldn't have mentioned it. :} :{ :uhoh:

[Clive]

No worries "Flieg"

I should get back to the books. Up here they're into "Orals". And I don't mean the relaxing kind.

An oral exam on the Boeing is that much harder now that we must juggle the switching on and off of fuel tanks!

Touche, I hear you say! :O

Hoo roo.

[Fliegenmong]

Yes indeed Clive good luck mate, thanks for a pleasant afternoons worth of banter :ok: See ya 'round :)

[ACMS]

Oh No! not at all ACMS!!, not at all, there is much discussion re the banning of some and not of others, some topics ok some not whatever, I've no doubt you were banned
no worries mate :ok:

[HotDog]

Let me get this straight. So every Airbus is crap and every Airline that has bought one is stupid?:confused:

[xraf]

Let me get this straight. So every Airbus is crap and every Airline that has bought one is stupid?:confused:

Yep, thats about the size of it!:ok:

[Defenestrator]

Let me get this straight. So every Airbus is crap and every Airline that has bought one is stupid?

Geez lads if ya gonna be totally offensive you've gotta include the guys that fly them in that classification as well haven't you?? LMAO :}

(Tongue planted firmly in cheek Mr. Hotdog):ok:

[xraf]

Geez Def, You're right!

Lets see.... oh yes here we go.......the guys that fly them dont like being in control and would rather a computer flew the damn thing as they cant switch it off override it or need a proper stick!...

Yeah that'll do it!



















I know... Getting my coat!:ouch:

[Clive]

Don't take it all to heart Hot Dog. :)

Don't think I, for one, ever said they were crap or that any airline that buys them is stupid.

I drive a BM but I bought my daughter a Hyundai. Why? Affordable, does the job. But I know I'll be throwing it away after 3 or 4 years.

That don't make me stupid. Good financial decision in the short term (especially the way she drives!) but not a long term investment. That's how I, and many of my ilk, see the Boeing v's Airbus debate. But then we are biased of course!

I'll even drive the Hyundai when the wife's taken the BM. Quite like it..... but it ain't a BM thats for sure.

That's all I'm saying :}

[BFryker]

I have been a sceptic of the commercial success of the A380 from day one:

1. Passengers are becomming fed up with long immigration control queues at the end of long international flights. Being disgorged along with 800 other passengers for the obligatory rubber stamp is enough to make anyone cringe at the thought of so many fellow travelers.

2. Doesn't an 800 passenger jet make an almost irresistable target for the Middle Eastern contingent of God's army.

3. The purpose of this behemouth is supposedly to make air travel more affordable for the masses, which is in direct conflict with many of the European governments full blown propaganda efforts toward promoting the "global warming" myth. We have the same governments supporting both efforts concurrently; irrational - of course it is.

4. I'm fearful that the A380 was born more out of national pride than commercial effectiveness; in many respects reminiscent of the Concorde.


5. The B-747 was driven entirely by commercial demand and that's why is was a success. I dont think the highly socialized governments of europe who now want to back the A380 with taxpayer "investments" can still recall things called markets and customers.

[Bleve]

If Airbus delivers on its performance guarantees, on fuel burn and seat mile costs

argh yesssss, airbus have a long and proud history of that .....

[Wingspar]

Le Lemon!!!

[dijon moutard]

Guys and Gals
a little history lesson here about developing new technology ; boeing was nearly two years late on delivering the first commercial B747 and almost sent boeing to the wall and very close to financial bankruptcy.

it was originally designed for heavy lift operations for the USAF and it lost out on the contract and had to be redesigned for commercial pax operations.

i only wish our post WW II governments had concentrated their minds on technology and the aviation/space/tecnology manufacturing industry.

i admire the french/germans for having the guts to invest in FUTURE industry that was very high-tech and not relying on "digging holes in the ground ".

sure the A380 has problems but so did the B747 at the time ; and that is what happens when you attempt something that others have not done before !!!!!!!

PS : all governments have subsidised their aerospace industries ie directly like the europeans or indirectly through the military in the USA.

cheers
dijon moutard:ok:

[HotDog]

Well said dijon. To all the doomsayers; please read the following news report at:

Boeing has its problems

http://www.thestreet.com/_yahoo/news...mp;cm_ ite=NA

[18-Wheeler]

sure the A380 has problems but so did the B747 at the time ; and that is what happens when you attempt something that others have not done before !!!!!!!

But there's very little that's new in the A380. It's much the same technology as we've seen for years, just bigger.


The 747 was similar, granted, but the size of the contruction was a quantum leap larger, not a little bit larger like the A380, and the engines were also a totally new thing.
The 747 back in the late 60's would have been a much more difficult thing to do.

[Bolty McBolt]

In regard to the A380 there is one point that has not been addressed.

When QF were looking to purchase new aircraft in the late nineties, engineering were asked to put together costing revolving around maintenance / operational costs of the 777 Vs the Airbus products.

Part of the submission made to the board was a graph showing ongoing operational maint costs. The 777 "line" on the graph started high due to initial cost and slopped down due to the ease of maint ops design etc. The airbus product "line" on the graph started low because they are cheap but sloped upwards. Imagine a line gragh Cost Vs Time with the 2 lines crossing around the 7 - 8 year mark with the 777 being a much more viable/better product in the long run.

The board made their decision and the rest is history.... A330 :yuk:

The A380 is not cheap (list price is not cheap but who knows what the airlines bottom line will be now after the delay). No where in the press kit for the A380 does it talk up ease of maintenance like the Boeing 777 did. To quote Boeing.
" We are no longer going to build aircraft to keep maintenance engineers in a job !"

The ongoing cost of this big Bus may be its undoing for a long future.

As "hotdog" says airbus out sold Boeing but perhaps the longevity of the cheaper operation cost of the aircraft far exceeds the life of a board member.

As Chemical Ali says, Bring on the OT as by the time this big buss arrives there will be no one left to maintain it

[LonBA]

PS : all governments have subsidised their aerospace industries ie directly like the europeans or indirectly through the military in the USA.

I can't believe people argue (with a straight face, no less), that a government procurement contract is considered a subsidy. This seems to ignore that the government is paying for a product/service and in the case of most governments, must be awarded via open bidding.

Considering all governments purchase military equipment (including those in Europe, last time I checked), and actually all government purchase stuff in general, then every industry receives subsidies from governments all around the world. And they all should be deemed illegal and governments should not be allowed to purchase any sort of service or product.

:rolleyes:

[Clive]

BBC News reporting today that FEDEX has just cancelled the 10 A380 freighters that they had on order.

Of course QF and SQ have both increased their orders a little (I'm guessing the new price was too good to resist) but could this be the first of many cancellations?

[Fliegenmong]

Could be Clive, conversly could be the begining of increased small orders :confused:
How many did QF / SQ increase their orders btw?

[tlf]

BBC News reporting today that FEDEX has just cancelled the 10 A380 freighters that they had on order.



At the same time they have ordered 15 B777F's and optioned 15 more.

[B772]

There is speculation that UPS and MH will also cancel their A380 orders.

Most ppruners will be aware EK may flick the A330 and A340 when the dust settles. (No pun intended)

[Taildragger67]

Could be Clive, conversly could be the begining of increased small orders :confused:
How many did QF / SQ increase their orders btw?

QF recently said they will exercise options to take their firms from twelve to twenty (Dixon said they were always probably going to do so anyway); SQ said they will take up a further nine.

However in both cases, signatures still to be put on the dotted line so Airbus aren't counting them yet.

[Clive]

Thanks for fielding that one Taildragger. Been stuck in the Sim this Arvo so coundn't reply to Fliegenmong. Must admit I didn't have those figures anyway, so thanks again.

If UPS cancels also then UPS and Fedex could go ahead with the merger, if the rumours are correct. New company to be called FEDUP. :cool:

Just josh'in. No such rumour, but I couldn't resist dragging up that old joike! :E

Mind you everyone with orders will soon be very fedup, I'm sure.

[Clive]

Interesting report on CNN as I was submitting that last one....
EADS shares up 3% on rumours that a Middle Eastern investor is looking at buying in to the company. The plot thickens!


(edited for spelling - that Sim was tough!)

[Taildragger67]

Interesting report on CNN as I was submitting that last one....
EADS shares up 3% on rumours that a middle eastern investor is looking at buying in to the compant. The plot thickens!

Maybe after a recent audit, a certain large customer has decided that the only way to fix the problems :ugh: is to get in and do it themselves!!