Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Airbus and illegal aid

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Airbus and illegal aid

Old 24th Sep 2016, 13:38
  #21 (permalink)  
Paxing All Over The World
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hertfordshire, UK.
Age: 66
Posts: 9,736
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Tom Bangla
hijacked by transatlantic oneupmanship.
but - mostly - that's what trade is ...
PAXboy is online now  
Old 24th Sep 2016, 14:29
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: England
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
And the Yanks never did get to make a supersonic airliner (even the Ruskies did that!)
Scuffers is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2016, 03:58
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Scuffers View Post
That's simply not what happened.

AB won the contract, Boeing cried, got the process thrown out, then the specifications changed, etc etc.
Actually, there were spec changes, in mid bidding cycle.

Those changes favored the 330-based frame, which our Air Force didn't want in the first place.

Once those changes came to light - which was the basis of Boeing's complaint - the ensuing investigation, which is rather well documented, resulted in Airbus choosing to not compete - again - with a product that didn't really fit the original bid.

Read up on it before you come complaining back to me.

I'll add a snarky remark right here. Most of our troops don't want anything except Boeing in that role.

The reason is simple. Far before the formation of Airbus Industrie, KC-97s and KC-135s were refueling our fighters and everyone else's.


A final technical concern, the 330's fly by wire system, came to light. The 767 can do some things which the 330 simply can't or won't.

Anyway, cheers, have fun fighting about this, and as usual on this site, running the US down.
rottenray is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2016, 04:03
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Scuffers View Post
And the Yanks never did get to make a supersonic airliner (even the Ruskies did that!)
Not to get too pointed about this, the Russian supersonic never really did well. Your Concorde did for a while, but I get the feeling that it never really turned a profit.

That's another subsidy we should discuss in the future in a different thread.

In the mean time, keep blasting away and looking uninformed. It's fun to watch!


Cheers.
rottenray is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2016, 07:55
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
My paternal grandmother coming from an island with rich and smart people used to say: do you know how to break rules is a start but knowing not to get caught is basic if you want to do successfully.

Maybe Airbus should have seek advice from my grandmother.
Rwy in Sight is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2016, 20:26
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 77
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
" A final technical concern, the 330's fly by wire system, came to light. The 767 can do some things which the 330 simply can't or won't."

For example- cable-rat-hydraulic backup for minimal flight control when everything else turns to poo has been on 767 since day one over 30 years ago. check out Gimli glider . ..
CONSO is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2016, 23:46
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 77
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Ohhh - groooan- can you spell EMP effects on ALL electrical combined with NO hauptic feedback ? EMP effects are much more likely with military- and even with shielding- a LOT of things go poof...

But for a more detailed explanation go to military thread

http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...-46a-woes.html

BTW-The initial subsidy argument/issues re Airbus started in year 2000 by a Boeing union.- In mid 2001- Boeing hired an ex deputy sec of defense ( Rudy deLeon ) to pursue WTO issues independent of Union. When 911 happened, things turned to worms re commercial- and a suggestion to prop up commerical with insurance and lease 767 tankers to keep at least that line open . Boeing then stifled Union work on a WTO complaint and elected to push the tanker deal since Japenese and Italian tankers were aborning at that time. Since funding was not available to purchase, a lease arrangement was proposed. But Boeing furbared that whole thing up via major mismanagement and the rest is history.
CONSO is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2016, 01:24
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Asia
Posts: 2,372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
What about the massive agricultural subsidies given by the US government to American farmers enabling them to dump their products on the world market at below the cost of production and still make a profit ?
Metro man is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2022 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.