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:

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 :}

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.

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

Le Lemon!!!

B747 History
 

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:

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

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.

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

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:

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?

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

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

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)

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.

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.

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!)

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!!