Boeing Giving Up On Airliners?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boeing Giving Up On Airliners?
A new study has aviation industry analysts buzzing and Boeing furiously denying the conclusions it reaches. According to the study, done by Prof. Alan MacPherson, of State University of New York at Buffalo, and David Pritchard, Boeing will be out of the airliner business within 10 years and will be concentrating on military and special aircraft. "This report is riddled with factual inaccuracies and mistaken conclusions," protested Boeing spokesman Todd Becher, who said Boeing is in the airliner business "for the long term."
Full Article
Full Article
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure how much you are involved in commercial aviation but if you are, you should at least be aware of the initial findings of AA587. If not, I suggest you review some past postings on PPRUNE.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
b777,or ??
as a bus driver and ex b747 afficiando...
i regret the loss of "likeing the aeroplane", but if you look at efficency and costs, b have a lot of catch up to do..
if you will in future buy your ticket on the internet, at the best price,check even now whether the best prices are from bo,s or bus,s...
i regret the loss of "likeing the aeroplane", but if you look at efficency and costs, b have a lot of catch up to do..
if you will in future buy your ticket on the internet, at the best price,check even now whether the best prices are from bo,s or bus,s...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: MiddleEast
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As much as Boeing is falling behind Airbus technicallyand orders does not automatically mean they will get out of airliner production. However having said that, I do remember reading some time ago an artical about Boeing in which one of the Boeing management stating that they intended to reduce their emphasis on Commercial aircraft production in favour of the more lucritive military production. True or not only time will tell.
Have a nice day
Have a nice day
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: 38N
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
320Driver - I am familiar but not particularly sanguine in regard to the "tapdance on the pedals" theory. Airbus effectively controls access to the factual data from which all interpretations must arise and thus far appears to have been less than forthcoming about aspects of the flight record and the systems design, probably for purposes of legal manoeuvering in the civil litigation.
It is not exactly the high water mark for 'bus credibility, but other airframe companies have weathered much worse. Still, 'breaking up in flight' does carry a bit of negative connotation.
It is not exactly the high water mark for 'bus credibility, but other airframe companies have weathered much worse. Still, 'breaking up in flight' does carry a bit of negative connotation.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Greater Aldergrove
Age: 53
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its not many years ago since Boeing were riding high over Airbus. Any industry where you have two big players tends to be cyclical. At the minute Airbus have the edge - a massive investment in new models has seen to that. But Boeing can use the 7E7 as the start of a turn-around. With that aircraft, plus the 777, the core of the range will be very modern. Then the big question is whether to do something 737 size and go for volume, or something like the BWB at the upper end. But any reports of Boeings demise, after a couple of bad years, is very naive.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Avon, CT, USA
Age: 68
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I guess it makes sense. It seems like airlines and leasing firms are always playing off Boeing against Airbus. If Boeing goes the military only route they won’t have any of these headaches. Airlines and leasing firms will be in a difficult situation with only one supplier.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Nirvana South
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As soon as I saw "Digital Projection by Boeing" on Star Wars Episode 2, I thought they'd made their decision. This was reinforced by a visit to the 73 line at Renton last year - as echoing & empty as any BAC plant was in the 70s.
Can't help thinking that it's a great loss to both the US & the aircraft industry in general when you don't adequately use the talents of one of the greatest design teams ever. It will be a double loss as Lazy B people are the technical backbone to many of the industry groups that dream up & standardize the systems we all rely on.
Can't help thinking that it's a great loss to both the US & the aircraft industry in general when you don't adequately use the talents of one of the greatest design teams ever. It will be a double loss as Lazy B people are the technical backbone to many of the industry groups that dream up & standardize the systems we all rely on.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not being cute just looking for answers...
Why should the military be more lucrative? Is it because they are inefficient in costing and managing projects, so that it is easy to run over budget and/or overcharge? Or is it that the technology used is simply more expensive? Or is it that they have a higher rate of hull loss than commercial and so need replacements? Or is it that they pay up front and/or guarantee a minimum purchase?
If the military were to become competitive in tendering and managing projects (little sign of that in the UK I fear, don't know about U.S. and others) then might not this "lucrative" edge be reduced?
Thanks for any feedback - Boeing has been looking after me for many years and I sincerely hope that they continue to do so.
Why should the military be more lucrative? Is it because they are inefficient in costing and managing projects, so that it is easy to run over budget and/or overcharge? Or is it that the technology used is simply more expensive? Or is it that they have a higher rate of hull loss than commercial and so need replacements? Or is it that they pay up front and/or guarantee a minimum purchase?
If the military were to become competitive in tendering and managing projects (little sign of that in the UK I fear, don't know about U.S. and others) then might not this "lucrative" edge be reduced?
Thanks for any feedback - Boeing has been looking after me for many years and I sincerely hope that they continue to do so.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: uk
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think part of the problem is the way the company has sold its self to its shareholders. It has made an effort to project the image of a “high tech” company, and it has succeeded. With this success has come an expectation in the shareholders for “high tech” rates of return. The reality is a company that has a large part of its business in engineering manufacture. The rates of return in this sort of industry are a lot lower than “high tech”.
One answer could be to split up the company so each part can be seen in its own light. A big problem for the airline part would be how to raise the capital to replace the obsolete product lines (all bar the very successful 777).
One answer could be to split up the company so each part can be seen in its own light. A big problem for the airline part would be how to raise the capital to replace the obsolete product lines (all bar the very successful 777).
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Northwich
Posts: 179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey guys,get real.
Airbus are targetting a sustained 50% of the commercial aircraft market...where do you think the rest will come from.
A 747 has a sticker price of $150 M it costs Boeing around half that to produce a 74 now that is a lucrative market.
Airbus are targetting a sustained 50% of the commercial aircraft market...where do you think the rest will come from.
A 747 has a sticker price of $150 M it costs Boeing around half that to produce a 74 now that is a lucrative market.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the watch list
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it is true, than it would be a sad day. Perhaps they might cut back a bit but then again in rough times it's an easy made assumption that they will concentrate on less products and with better profit margin. But, the market moves up and down as we all know. Unnecessary to say these times are some of the toughest the industry has faced. Even so, it will someday look better.
Will Boeing make cuts? Likely.
Will they abandon less successful models sooner? Likely.
Will Boeings place in commercial aviation fade? Don’t think so. IMAO
Will Boeing make cuts? Likely.
Will they abandon less successful models sooner? Likely.
Will Boeings place in commercial aviation fade? Don’t think so. IMAO
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down East
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not going to happen. Boeing will be building airliners for a long,long time to come. The only airline in the U.S. that has made a constant profit for the past 30 years is SW with a 100% B-737 fleet.
The Americans will never allow themselves to become totally dependent on the Frogs for airliners or for that matter anything else.
The Americans will never allow themselves to become totally dependent on the Frogs for airliners or for that matter anything else.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Man
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what will the Americans buy once the 757/747 production lines close down then? Nothing in the boeing pipeline at the moment to replace these aircraft as the 7E7 is larger than a current 757 model and a 773 is no match for an A380.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: the watch list
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"When the 757/747 line close down?" How big a crystal ball do you have?
These lines will stay online for a long time, perhaps longer than some of our careers!
Sure the 737 has be been a child of the 60s and still is but the 757 is still ahead of it's time.
These lines will stay online for a long time, perhaps longer than some of our careers!
Sure the 737 has be been a child of the 60s and still is but the 757 is still ahead of it's time.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Around
Age: 56
Posts: 572
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Knold
The problem is that nobody is buying the 757 ... If memory serves me right, Flight International's 2002 survey revealed that the production may halt at the end of 2003 if no new orders are booked, at the current production rate. It may be ahead of it's time, but it's still not selling at the same rate as the A321.
The 747 is also selling very slow; I belive the -400LR has only sold a handful of copies to QF and AF. Seems that large pax transport orders goes to Airbus, whereas the -400 only seems to have a future in the cargo hauling business.
And the 767 ain't faring much better either ....
It'll be 3 - 4 years before the 7E7 enters the fray, and only as a single "stand-alone" product. It will take a few years more before it evolves into a family of aircraft, but will Boeing be able to turn a profit on an ever aging product range for another, perhaps, 10 years?
Having said all that, here's hoping that they'll stay in business. The industry needs, at least, two competitors in the medium-to-large airframe business.
The 747 is also selling very slow; I belive the -400LR has only sold a handful of copies to QF and AF. Seems that large pax transport orders goes to Airbus, whereas the -400 only seems to have a future in the cargo hauling business.
And the 767 ain't faring much better either ....
It'll be 3 - 4 years before the 7E7 enters the fray, and only as a single "stand-alone" product. It will take a few years more before it evolves into a family of aircraft, but will Boeing be able to turn a profit on an ever aging product range for another, perhaps, 10 years?
Having said all that, here's hoping that they'll stay in business. The industry needs, at least, two competitors in the medium-to-large airframe business.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: London
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The USAF tanker order is likely to keep the 767 line open for a few more years yet. Maybe the US military needs to find a use for a few dozen 757s as well? If not, the B739 and A321 are taking a big bite out of the lower end of the 757 market, while the 7E7 threatens the upper end.
Of course the reborn Iraqi (but perhaps US managed) Airways is more than likely to be ordering Boeings, not French/German (and only slightly British) Airbuses, just as PIA's Airbus preference was switched by the government to 777s.
The 747 line is probably more secure as it has no direct competitors, and plenty of scope for price cuts.
Of course the reborn Iraqi (but perhaps US managed) Airways is more than likely to be ordering Boeings, not French/German (and only slightly British) Airbuses, just as PIA's Airbus preference was switched by the government to 777s.
The 747 line is probably more secure as it has no direct competitors, and plenty of scope for price cuts.