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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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
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.

Airbus looking shaky?
 

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...

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

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"

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

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?

Airbus CEO Quits
 

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.........."

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

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

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

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

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

Cheers HD.

Snap Crackle Pop!
 

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?