Japanese and French to go Supersonic (Welcome back Concorde)
Grandpa Aerotart
Ghengis...the Brits sold the Yanks a pup when it sold the Hs125...even a 20 yr old Falcon 200 is a much better aeroplane in almost every respect than a brand new Hawker 800XP....and yes I know from experience.
How can it be though that the same country that builds such wonderful aeropanes (Falcons) builds Airbusses too
How can it be though that the same country that builds such wonderful aeropanes (Falcons) builds Airbusses too
Somebody clearly disagrees with you, or Raytheon wouldn't be selling so many Hawkers.
I'm no expert on either type, and don't know why - but there's clearly a reason since nobody spends that money without being quite clear that it's the right buy.
G
I'm no expert on either type, and don't know why - but there's clearly a reason since nobody spends that money without being quite clear that it's the right buy.
G
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Meon Valley
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
G
You could say the same about the Rover 25 I suppose.
Anyway. When they say Fench, who do they mean. EADS, Airbus or Dassualt (the later having studied a sst business jet recently)
You could say the same about the Rover 25 I suppose.
Anyway. When they say Fench, who do they mean. EADS, Airbus or Dassualt (the later having studied a sst business jet recently)
Can someone remind me what the really good reason for disposing of BAE's offering in the only fast-growing, profitable and reasonably uncontroversial sector of the industry was?
Was it about the time that the then CE of BAe was publically pronouncing that building whole aeroplanes was a daft idea, we should allow foreigners to do that, and simply be profitable subcontractors?
G
G
Poor Southerner
The Rover 25 (and all the other Rovers) make Ghengis's point admirably. They were such rubbish that nobody (or hardly anybody) did buy them - or would only buy them at a price that wasn't profitable for the manufacturer and his hangers on - thus Rover went bust.
The only way Rover's are being sold off now is at about half list price.
Are you trying to tell us that Hawker's are in the some position ???
The only way Rover's are being sold off now is at about half list price.
Are you trying to tell us that Hawker's are in the some position ???
I met a flying instructor recently who had only just qualified. I asked him why he'd made the career change?
"Oh, my old company was clearly going nowhere, so I got out when I could"
"Who were they?"
"I was a design engineer with Rover Group".
In the meantime, does anybody want to buy my Wife's Rover 25, going cheap?
G
"Oh, my old company was clearly going nowhere, so I got out when I could"
"Who were they?"
"I was a design engineer with Rover Group".
In the meantime, does anybody want to buy my Wife's Rover 25, going cheap?
G
Grandpa Aerotart
G The Hs125 was a pup. Compared to a Falcon it had onerous maintenance schedules, poor cockpit ergonomics, poor payload range, small cabin, no external baggage. poor BFL peformance, slower.
The maintenance issues were in the main addressed in the 800 and the 800XP is not a bad little aeroplane by any measure...just not as good as a Falcon 200, a design 20 yrs older, in any areas EXCEPT the engines on the 800XP are much cheaper to maintain.
The engines on the Falcon 200 are great...quiet, fuel miserly, powerfull...and complicated therefore expensive to maintain.
Why did Ratheon buy the rights to the Hawker? I suppose it was the best they could get for their money and a quick fix to fill a hole in their design books...without clean sheeting a new Bizjet. Dassault was never going to sell them the rights to the Falcon 20/200 or 50 after all....where else could they get a Bizjet design cheaply?
If you compare the Falcon 200, or better still the Falcon 20F-5 (which put the same engine as the 800XP onto a 20/200 airframe thereby fixing the aircraft's only maintenance shortcoming at the expence of a little performance) with contemporay Hs125s the difference is startling. The Hs125-700 was a piece of ****e.
Ratheon bought a pup and turned it into a pedigree....but it still took an extra 20+ years of airframe development to get an aeroplane that wasn't as good as an aeroplane Dassault designed in the 60s, the Falcon 20, and had refined to it's ultimate form in the 70s, the Falcon 200.
The Brits do many things very well..they have had some world beating ideas...jet engines, angled decks, steam catapults etc. The have designed some of the prettiest aeroplanes, the Spitfire, Mossy, Hunter...and some great aeroplanes like the Lancaster and with French input the Concorde was a truly marvelous aeroplane...though hardly an economic success story.
What Britian does not do or has not done since the mid 40s, is design world beating aeroplanes...if it did it would still have an aerospace industry of it's own....the Hs125 was a bad choice as an example of losing a good aeroplane to a foriegn manufacturer. 
The maintenance issues were in the main addressed in the 800 and the 800XP is not a bad little aeroplane by any measure...just not as good as a Falcon 200, a design 20 yrs older, in any areas EXCEPT the engines on the 800XP are much cheaper to maintain.
The engines on the Falcon 200 are great...quiet, fuel miserly, powerfull...and complicated therefore expensive to maintain.
Why did Ratheon buy the rights to the Hawker? I suppose it was the best they could get for their money and a quick fix to fill a hole in their design books...without clean sheeting a new Bizjet. Dassault was never going to sell them the rights to the Falcon 20/200 or 50 after all....where else could they get a Bizjet design cheaply?
If you compare the Falcon 200, or better still the Falcon 20F-5 (which put the same engine as the 800XP onto a 20/200 airframe thereby fixing the aircraft's only maintenance shortcoming at the expence of a little performance) with contemporay Hs125s the difference is startling. The Hs125-700 was a piece of ****e.
Ratheon bought a pup and turned it into a pedigree....but it still took an extra 20+ years of airframe development to get an aeroplane that wasn't as good as an aeroplane Dassault designed in the 60s, the Falcon 20, and had refined to it's ultimate form in the 70s, the Falcon 200.
The Brits do many things very well..they have had some world beating ideas...jet engines, angled decks, steam catapults etc. The have designed some of the prettiest aeroplanes, the Spitfire, Mossy, Hunter...and some great aeroplanes like the Lancaster and with French input the Concorde was a truly marvelous aeroplane...though hardly an economic success story.
What Britian does not do or has not done since the mid 40s, is design world beating aeroplanes...if it did it would still have an aerospace industry of it's own....the Hs125 was a bad choice as an example of losing a good aeroplane to a foriegn manufacturer.
Last edited by Chimbu chuckles; 24th Jun 2005 at 03:40.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Meon Valley
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Rover 25 note was more akin to a so-so product, clearly out of date, not making a profit. But always found buyers despite this.
As an aside comment. I'm pleased president Blair didn't lean to the old labour ways and pump millions of tax revenue into proping up this dinasour. Just to keep a load of brummies in work. From my view doing this with failing large companies is un-fair. I like the majority of British industry am a small business with less than 10 staff. Would they give me £1m to increase my profits, staff and tax revenues or £ 500m to rover so it can live for another year, deffer its p.a.y.e and vat and just leave a bigger hole in the end.
Sorry off-topic rant over.
As an aside comment. I'm pleased president Blair didn't lean to the old labour ways and pump millions of tax revenue into proping up this dinasour. Just to keep a load of brummies in work. From my view doing this with failing large companies is un-fair. I like the majority of British industry am a small business with less than 10 staff. Would they give me £1m to increase my profits, staff and tax revenues or £ 500m to rover so it can live for another year, deffer its p.a.y.e and vat and just leave a bigger hole in the end.
Sorry off-topic rant over.
I must admit that I couldn't work out whether Mrs.G's Rover 200 (later renamed 25) was a bad car, or it just suffered from her Son's tendency to keep crashing it just after he learned to drive (3 times if I recall). Certainly I agree that it was right not to try and keep Rover group alive - we are a healthy net producer and exporter of cars, and likely to remain so. The fact that these cars have badges like "Nissan" and "Honda" is surely irrelevant - if they were designed and built here, by Brits, and usually most of the parts subcontracting is in the UK as well, who cares where the small percentage of profit goes or what the badge is.
Back on topic, IMHO the UK does still have a worldbeating aircraft industry, we're just not very good at doing whole airliners. Even he US Navy bought Hawks - as has half the planet, the Airbus wing factory at Hawarden is a truly brilliant (and highly profitable) bit of engineering. The Lynx is pretty much the "NATO standard" helicopter, there's probably not a country in the world that you'll find an Islander, and so on. The yanks wouldn't be in bed with us on JSF if we weren't the real Harrier / VTOL experts, Rolls Royce are still regularly the preferred engine for many American airliner buyers. We have no monopoly, but we're still the 3rd biggest aerospace industry in the world.
Which isn't to say that I don't disagree strongly with the board of BAE in particular being hellbent on ensuring that they never have anything to do with whole aircraft manufacture and testing - it's a process that gives you a degree of control and oversight of the design process like no other. I'm quite certain that many senior engineers I've met who work for BAE share this view.
So, we aint done yet, but really do need to shoot a few management accountants and let the Engineers design and build decent new aeroplanes - and keep doing so to ensure that we maintain the national skills base, which is rapidly degrading.
G
Back on topic, IMHO the UK does still have a worldbeating aircraft industry, we're just not very good at doing whole airliners. Even he US Navy bought Hawks - as has half the planet, the Airbus wing factory at Hawarden is a truly brilliant (and highly profitable) bit of engineering. The Lynx is pretty much the "NATO standard" helicopter, there's probably not a country in the world that you'll find an Islander, and so on. The yanks wouldn't be in bed with us on JSF if we weren't the real Harrier / VTOL experts, Rolls Royce are still regularly the preferred engine for many American airliner buyers. We have no monopoly, but we're still the 3rd biggest aerospace industry in the world.
Which isn't to say that I don't disagree strongly with the board of BAE in particular being hellbent on ensuring that they never have anything to do with whole aircraft manufacture and testing - it's a process that gives you a degree of control and oversight of the design process like no other. I'm quite certain that many senior engineers I've met who work for BAE share this view.
So, we aint done yet, but really do need to shoot a few management accountants and let the Engineers design and build decent new aeroplanes - and keep doing so to ensure that we maintain the national skills base, which is rapidly degrading.
G
And let's not forget the episode when Rolls Royce decided to run a "test" one day, and so took one of the automotive engines (a Rolls Royce motor), and run it for 500 HOURS continually at maximum RPM, with nothing coming apart. They took a multitude of different American V8s, and as far as I recall, couldn't get ANY of them to go beyond a few hours...
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wherever i lay my hat, that's my home...
Age: 44
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with G on the previous page. I work for an aerospace sub-contractor at the moment.
I think there will be an apparent shift of Aerospace (and automotive) industry away from the UK. It will be just that though, apparent.
When the visible part of a company, the manufacture aspect, moves it does appear to be the whole company which has moved, as the other departments are quiet to the outside world.
We are leaving all design, engineering, quality, procurement, sales etc in the uk, with the manufacture abroad to attract lower labour rates.
It is not just in Aerospace, a good friend of mine works in board games... same thing!
I think for manufacture to remain in the UK, much automation has to be employed. Which is why I think Honda and the like have remaind firmly in Blighty.
As far as I can tell from a few friends who work for Rover suppliers, Rover was very human labour orientated, and so therefore manufacture costs were high.
I think there will be an apparent shift of Aerospace (and automotive) industry away from the UK. It will be just that though, apparent.
When the visible part of a company, the manufacture aspect, moves it does appear to be the whole company which has moved, as the other departments are quiet to the outside world.
We are leaving all design, engineering, quality, procurement, sales etc in the uk, with the manufacture abroad to attract lower labour rates.
It is not just in Aerospace, a good friend of mine works in board games... same thing!
I think for manufacture to remain in the UK, much automation has to be employed. Which is why I think Honda and the like have remaind firmly in Blighty.
As far as I can tell from a few friends who work for Rover suppliers, Rover was very human labour orientated, and so therefore manufacture costs were high.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: where I shouldn’t be
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Japan first actual SST test flight next month
As I have posted earlier, the Japanese and the French have further upped the ante in reestablishing an SST.
SST Test Flight
SST Test Flight
