# Airbus



## syscom3 (Oct 18, 2006)

I saw this article this morning about EADS and the future of Airbus.

Please post any others you have. Lets keep this on a proffesional level and not have a silly name calling "Boeing vs Airbus" battle.

October 18, 2006; Page A21

Aerospace codgers must be having a Rip Van Winkle moment. There was a time when Europe's supersonic Concorde was ringing up orders and seemed destined to be the future of commercial aviation. Then costs ballooned and the economics dropped out of the project. Only 14 planes were put into service with the national airlines of Britain and France, a face-saving gesture subsidized by taxpayers.

Nothing quite so ignominious will likely be the fate of the giant Airbus 380, although it's interesting to note that 15 just happens to be the number of assembled, flightworthy planes stranded amid the current production shutdown. But one thing is certain: Any hope that Airbus would become more like a real company, and less like a make-work-cum-technological ego trip for European governments, just went out the window.

Christian Streiff, the short-lived Airbus chief who resigned last week, was concise about why he wanted full control to impose a brutal overhaul of how the European group does business: "We must generate cash to afford [to launch a competitor to Boeing's hot-selling 787] and continue investing in the future."

He was cashiered, which means investment cash now will have to come from somewhere else, i.e., European taxpayers.

The crisis suits Spain just fine, eager to increase its government ownership of Airbus and grab more of the work as a result. The German government is leaking a proposal to take a direct stake, buying shares that DaimlerChrysler wants to sell. The city of Hamburg craves a piece of ownership too, to protect local jobs.

All this is exactly the wrong way for Airbus to be headed, but there's another irresistible pressure on political meddlers. Five percent of Airbus's parent company was recently acquired by a Russian state-owned bank, which is now militating for a seat on the board. The Russian move, even more than the A380 troubles, probably guaranteed a reversal of Airbus's casual migration toward true privatization.

The A380 will fly in respectable numbers even if it never makes money. European taxpayers will see to that. The hastily redrawn A350 will sprout wings too, even if it's years late against the 787 and never recovers its costs. Ironically, the Airbus meltdown may one day be seen as the decisive ending of the flagging era of privatization. Its deficiencies notwithstanding, Airbus is admired by some Democrats as a template for future U.S. government enterprises to pursue carbon control and "energy independence."

This comes as Washington has its finger on the trigger of a World Trade Organization proceeding on Airbus subsidies. The lawsuit has been paused for government-to-government negotiations, but it's hard to see a resolution now. Airbus may be the case that blows up the WTO, or Washington may back down to avoid a nobody-wins trade war.

Yet folks at Boeing seem more bemused than worried about the Airbus meltdown and its consequences. Sales have lately been stupendous. Boeing's 787 and 777 have commanding positions in the lucrative long-haul market. Only Airbus's single-aisle A320, the company's true home run, has been outselling Boeing's 737, but Boeing still has a fat order book of 737s.

Airbus will continue to be a government-subsidized competitor, but much of this advantage will be dissipated over a featherbedded work force and inefficient manufacturing system. So Boeing has nothing to worry about?

Not entirely. Building large commercial aircraft is a business where the decisions are few, much agonized over, and pregnant with long-run consequences. The decision that Boeing has been noodling for years, and likely planned to continue noodling for years, is when to launch a replacement (or multiple replacements) for the 737.

Planes in this class sell in large numbers (Boeing sold 569 last year, compared to barely more than 1,400 jumbos in the 747's 36-year existence). They are the foundation of scale and scope in the airliner assembly business.

Boeing's decision is complicated by several factors: desire not to cannibalize sales of the 737, concern that technology is not yet proven that would allow dramatic efficiency gains. Conservative thinking along these lines served Boeing well in choosing not to join in Airbus in the superjumbo gamble, but there's a new consideration in the post-737 sweepstakes: Airbus may be able to tap taxpayer money, but there's no bottomless well of engineering resources and skills to tap. Its preoccupation with the A380 and A350 means Airbus would be in no position to match a Boeing investment in a new short-haul workhorse for a decade or more.

Enter Pratt Whitney, which has spent 20 years pursuing a "geared turbofan" as a breakthrough technology to rebuild its lagging share in the engine marketplace. Never mind the technical specifications: The engine would allow the various spinning parts of a modern turbofan to operate at their own efficient speeds, saving fuel and maintenance costs.

Other engine makers have their own breakthroughs in development, but P&W's is the only technology in the works likely to justify an early gamble on a 737 replacement. Pratt says the engine will be flight-tested in 2008.

Game theorists, fire up your workstations. CFO Dave Anderson of Honeywell told an investors conference last month that his company expects to compete for contracts related to the 737 replacement later this year. Southwest Airlines, a big 737 customer, is pushing for a new plane. Don't be surprised if Boeing, in despair at getting relief at the WTO, decides its best bet is to move fast to cement its lead while Airbus struggles.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 18, 2006)

Emirates is sitting on $43 Billion in A380 orders and has announced they are contemplating changing many of those to A340/A330. As one of THE primary launch customers, this is giving investors fits.

Let's face it. A world with no competitive manufacturing, is a world destined for no innovation and high airframe costs. As much as some folks would like to see one or the other manufacturer suffer its demise, the operators are certainly not hoping for the same. Eveyone would suffer.

Hope I didn't violate your rules from above, but I have a hard time decoupling this discussion from the rivalry.


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 18, 2006)

Matt, I saw that article too about the UAE thinking of cancelling or cutting orders. I suspect they wont, as they can leverage the A380 delays into great deals on other aircraft they would buy anyway. 

What I am interested in too, is the number of A380 airframes Airbus has to sell to break even. The delay penalties they are paying for, and the loss of productive time building the aircraft is increasing the numbers needed.

I dont mind this thread being a Boeing vs Airbus battle...... just no name calling (Boeing or Airbus sucks!!!!) and deal with the subject on a technical level.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 18, 2006)

Good.

As you are probably aware, the actual numbers and $ necessary to break even is closely guarded. You might surmise, however, that the launch of the airplane is an indication that the numbers of firm orders indicate very little risk. The numbers that are being released by Airbus and the operators are also subject to debate. As this information is proprietary between Airbus and each individual operator. They don't need operators competing with each other on concessions, don't ya know! However, I have read that EADS is claiming losses of almost $5Billion in profits whose hemmorhaging will not be staunched until 2009.

Of interesting note, is EADS additional effort to build the A400M. An internal audit is underway with that program too. EADS has officially stated that A380 engineering will in no way affect the A400M, but time may tell on what is really going on.

I'm reading that over 10,000 people may be laid off. Supposedly these would not be manufacturing/integration types, but rather administrative and mid level management. That's a lot of people in mid management.


----------



## Glider (Oct 18, 2006)

There was a piece in the paper today about BA replacing all its long distance fleet. Its in the initial stages and the planes will not be needed for 8-10 years.
You probably are aware that BA long haul is all Boeing but I bet they could cut the deal of the century with Airbus.

lets see how this goes


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 18, 2006)

Glider, I think you will see BA have a mix of -380's and 787's.

The -350 isnt even in the design stage and I wouldnt bet on it being around till 2015, if then.

The -380 will have its issues worked out by then, but I dont think you will see many airports in the world that could handle it. No airport is going to spend the hundred of millions in dollars on infrastructure to handle an occaison A380.

I think the 787 is the future of aviation. People will always prefer to go point to point than to change flights in hub airports.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 18, 2006)

Or so Boeing has stated. However, I think Asia is going to change the way the world thinks of aviation. Japan already uses single class 747-400s for short domestic hops. The A380 is likely to capture those types of operations that are surely to increase with China's burgeoning society.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 19, 2006)

geez i don't want this to degrade into name calling either but the first article you posted syscom is even more bias than me  just as much in the tone of the writing than the subject matter..........

and i can see what syscom's saying about the future of BA, however they will more than likely put more emphasis on the A380 for major routes such as London-New York which are very lucrative, they would rather get more people onto bigger aircraft and soldier on with slightly older planes for longer trips with smaller capacities, budget airlines however would much rather have the Beoing..........


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 19, 2006)

Lanc, but look at it this way, if a sizeable number of the passengers fly to these hubs just to change planes to go to their ultimate destinations, then what happens to the -380 passenger loads when many fly will on the 777 or 787 to the smaller airports?

I remember my traveling days, and I would have liked to travel from point to point and not go through hubs


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 19, 2006)

for a major route like London-New York you don't need to stop over...........


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 19, 2006)

the lancaster kicks *** said:


> for a major route like London-New York you don't need to stop over...........




Thats true, and thats where the -380 will be usefull. But that also assumes that all the passangers have NYC as a final destination.


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 19, 2006)

This is really bad news for Airbus. They only have sold 159 of them, far short of the goal of profitablity. Plus the demands for additional compensation from the airlines sure isnt going to push that number down anytime soon.

The Seattle Times: Business Technology: First profitable A380 superjumbo will now be the 421st sold, Airbus says

Airbus, the world's largest maker of commercial aircraft, conceded today that the chances of making a profit on the 555-seat A380 model slipped years into the future because of cost overruns and production delays.

The planemaker will reach the breakeven point in the program with the delivery of the 420th A380, according to the latest analysis, compared with 270 aircraft in a 2005 business plan, Airbus said today in a report posted on the Web site of parent company European, Aeronautic Defense Space (EADS).

Airbus has so far received orders for only 159 A380s and customers, angered by the delays, have threatened to cancel some contracts. Under current planning, Toulouse, France-based Airbus will deliver only 84 of the planes by 2010, compared with the 159 aircraft estimated as recently as June, with a total operating loss in the period of $6 billion.

EADS said Oct. 3 that the A380's first delivery is now scheduled for the fourth quarter of 2007, a year after the most recent plan and the third postponement in 16 months. The delays, first disclosed in June 2005, have prompted the departure of two top executives. Airbus estimated as recently as mid-2004 that the A380 would be profitable after 250 deliveries.

The A380's lifetime deliveries will total 751 aircraft, unchanged from a 2005 forecast, Airbus Chief Financial Officer Andreas Sperl said in the Web site report. That compares with 1,000 A380s that Airbus expected to sell over the model's half- century lifecycle in May 2004.

Airbus risks airlines making operating-cost comparisons with Boeing's smaller 787 model, which will be going into service about the same time, said Hans Weber, president of San Diego-based Tecop International, a consulting company.

Tecop has estimated Airbus will sell 496 A380s, including 43 freighter versions, through 2025, and "since we did this study in 2001, we think there are indications the number will be smaller," Weber said. The A380 is designed to serve routes linking large hub airports, while the 787 will allow more so- called point-to-point routes between less populated cities.

"There's only a relatively small number of routes in the world where hub-to-hub flying makes sense," Weber said. "That number has not increased, whereas the number of point-to-point flights has increased."

The A380 delays have carved "huge holes out of our resources," and "we have to take cost-cutting measures to compensate for this," EADS Co-Chief Executive Officer Tom Enders said at an aviation conference in Berlin today. "We don't want the A380 to be the last model we build. We want to keep making new airplanes."

The planemaker will centralize purchasing, seek more supplies from lower-cost countries, streamline and contract out component shipments and work to reduce spending on services, Airbus Senior Vice President of Financial Control Harald Wilhelm said in a separate presentation on EADS's Web site.

The German division of Airbus said Oct. 17 that it reduce the workweek, cut 14 percent of its temporary workforce and give employees who work overtime extra time off instead of additional pay in response to the A380 production delays.

Airbus will receive a "grace period" of one year if it can't repay German government loans on time because of the production delays, the Economy Ministry said in a written response to an opposition party question that was obtained today by Bloomberg News.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 19, 2006)

well to most desdinations in America, Europe and the near east (although i don't know the A380's range) will be reachable in one go, i'd love to see the range of the A380 imposed onto a map...........

edit- you posted your other post whilst i was typing this one


----------



## twoeagles (Oct 19, 2006)

This has been a very interesting discussion. Although trained as an aeronautical engineer, I never worked on transport aircraft...But in the world of major weapons systems, 80+% of life time cost is maintenance and logistics. What I have not seen with A380, while efficient in revenue/passenger mile, is compelling maintenance savings for any airline selecting to change from BA heavies. There's an enormous up front cost involved unless they are outsourcing all the logistics/maintenance, and then it is still a gamble that passengers will love flying on a moving hotel which offers a fairly limited number of destinations equipped to handle it. Lob a grenade at me for suggesting this, but when Airbuis was riding high and Boeing was on the ropes a few years ago, I think their collective executive ego was in overdrive and pushed them to attempt the 380. I think the early business models reflected what the executives wanted to see.

Tom


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 19, 2006)

I do think that Airbus had some ego problems..... emulating the soviet era charachteristic of "giganticism".

There are some heavily traveled routes between some cities, where the -380 will make sense, but the huge majority of passnagers ultimatly end up at smaller airports.

Could you imagine tourists flying directly from Tokyo to Las Vegas and not having to go through the San Fran or LAX hubs?


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 19, 2006)

Yes, but...

The projected passenger numbers is slated to increase by huge margins during the lifetime of the A380. I am not a supporter of the monster per se, but rather recognize that the business model is a sound one. World economies are scrambling to figure out how to increase efficiency of their natinoal airspace systems and right now are bleeding a turnip looking for single digit increases through technology introduction such as RNP, RVSM, data link, ADS-B, 30-30 separation oceanic, traffic flow management tools, collaborate decision making, terminal arrival procedures, wake vortex profiling, etc. The list goes on and on. The NIMBY folks are always going to stifle new concrete and it is only here that true gains in efficiency can be realized for air transportation. Thus if there are not more runways, then the airplanes are going to have to get bigger in some markets. I think historically this has been proven with the manufacturing and sale of ever larger payload aircraft.

TwoEagles makes a valid point. There are claimed efficiencies in maintenance for the A380, but likely they are marginal in the scheme of things. MROs are becoming the norm in order to farm out maintenance activities to lower and lower payed employees working multiple airframes across multiple operators. The A380 makes use of open architecture for its avionics allowing for upgrades and maintenance to be performed "on the fly" with minimal downtime. The airframe too is making more and more use of composite structures touted to minimize inspections, repair, and major check downtime.  Unique to the A380, no. But certainly a major consideration in its development.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 21, 2006)

I think the concept is quite intriguing and to be able to fly non stop from Tokyo to St. Louis would be amazing. I also think the aircraft is amazing but I dont think the planning of this endevour was the greatest.


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 21, 2006)

I'd agree with you Chris but for high density routes the A-380 would be perfect, in some places in Japan they are using single class 747's on short haul routes... I suspect that it will take them a long time to break even with it (they may not) but as a idea it is probably a sound one the same as Boeing's with the 7E7 both concepts will work but the 7E7 will sell more units and thus be more profitable.


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 21, 2006)

Airbus must now sell more aircraft in order to make money.

*



it had to sell 420 of the aircraft, as opposed to the 270 originally planed. So far, the Franco-German company has received 159 orders

Click to expand...

*
Airbus Must Sell More A380s To Break Even - Forbes.com

Solving Airbus's superjumbo financial problem with its A380 won't just be a matter of re-wiring its aircraft. It needs to sell a lot more planes.

EADS, the tardy planemaker's parent company, said at an investors' forum that in order for the A380 program to break even, it had to sell 420 of the aircraft, as opposed to the 270 originally planed. So far, the Franco-German company has received 159 orders for the double-decker planes from 16 customers.

It's not the first time Airbus has publicly changed its breakeven point. On March 9 last year, Philippe Camus, the then-co-chief executive of EADS, said the A380 project would break even when it sold 300 planes. On the same day, EADS's other then-co-chief executive, Rainer Hertrich, was quoted as saying that Airbus would need to sell around 250 of the planes to break even.

Confused? So was a spokesman for Airbus, who said his division could not comment on the new breakeven point because it had been announced by EADS. Spokespersons for EADS in France and Germany could not be reached for immediate comment.

Airbus is reported to be budgeting for 751 deliveries of the A380, but the aircraft's two year delay will slash the company's expected cash flow by $7.92 billion (6.3 billion euros).


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 29, 2006)

This is f****ed. AS much as I like the Boeing-Airbus battles, I abhore seeing good paying US/European jobs go to the PRC.

Airbus to assemble its planes in China | FT business | The Australian

AIRBUS has signed a framework agreement with Chinese authorities to build its first aircraft assembly plant outside Europe, at Tianjin in eastern China.

It also agreed on Thursday to a preliminary deal for its biggest single order from China, for 170 aircraft, which could eventually be worth about $US14 billion ($18.2 billion) at list prices, before heavy discounts.

Airbus, a subsidiary of EADS, Europe's leading aerospace and defence group, is seeking to extend its industrial operations beyond its European base in France, Germany, Spain and Britain, and has made China a priority target both for increased sales and industrial co-operation.

It has failed to make much progress in the Japanese market, where US rival Boeing has an entrenched position both in sales and as an industrial partner, and the European group is seeking to develop a counterweight presence in China.

The new deals provided a temporary respite for EADS and Airbus from a prolonged crisis triggered by industrial and management problems, including costly two-year delays in deliveries of the A380 superjumbo and a E4.8 billion ($7.9 billion) lost earnings warning.

Airbus said it signed a framework agreement to assemble its successful A320 family of single-aisle, short-haul jets at a plant in the coastal city of Tianjin, east of Beijing. The plant is expected to be located in the huge Binhai development zone, which China's Government expects to rival manufacturing centres such as Shanghai and parts of the southern Pearl River delta. Airbus said it would begin assembling aircraft in China in early 2009 and aimed to increase production to four a month by 2011.

Louis Gallois, co-chief executive of EADS and chief executive of Airbus, said the aircraft sections for the A320 would continue to be produced in Europe but would be shipped to Tianjin for final assembly.

The Chinese consortium in establishing the plant will be led by the Tianjin Free Trade Zone and will include China Aviation Industry Corporation I (Avic I) and China Aviation Industry Corporation II (Avic II).

Airbus executive vice-president strategy Olivier Andries said the maker would hold a 51 per cent stake in the joint venture and would appoint the general manager. It would invest E100-150 million. "The main rationale in starting assembly is to build our presence in the Chinese market," he said.

The deal was signed during a visit to Beijing by French President Jacques Chirac and still needs formal approval by the EADS board and Beijing.

It was supported by a general terms of agreement for China to buy 150 A320 aircraft. Beijing also backed Airbus plans to develop the A35WB, a new family of long-range, medium-capacity jets, by signing a letter of intent for 20 aircraft.

Separately, Airbus said it had signed a firm contract for the purchase of 65 Airbus A319 aircraft with Skybus, a US low-cost, start-up airline based in Columbus, Ohio. The airline is aiming to start operations early next year.


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 29, 2006)

I figured that Airbus would be cutting costs on the 380 just to get some more sales. In the coming weeks, we will see how the "break even sales point" will stay at 420, or increase. Perhaps Quantus is getting some assembly slots for customers who are deferring their own positions?

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aBN_NV6ffCk0&refer=home

Oct. 29 (Bloomberg) -- Qantas Airways Ltd., Australia's biggest airline, placed an order for eight more A380 superjumbo planes made by Airbus SAS and valued at as much as $2.4 billion.

The order is on top of 12 that Qantas agreed earlier to buy, with deliveries between 2008 and 2015, the airline said in a statement on its Web site today. The Sydney-based carrier said it negotiated an ``attractive package'' for the A380s, and also ordered four A330-200 aircraft, worth as much as $652 million, according to catalog prices.

``It's a real vote of confidence when a lot of people are questioning what's going on at Airbus,'' said Matt Crowe, a transport analyst at JPMorgan Chase Co. in Sydney. Chief Executive Officer Geoff Dixon ``must be fairly confident that the problems that Airbus have had are coming to an end.''

The additional order by Qantas is a boost to the A380 program, which has suffered delays as Toulouse, France-based Airbus struggles to install wiring in the world's largest commercial plane. Airbus parent European Aeronautic, Defence Space Co. estimated on Oct. 3 that the A380 delays will cut 4.8 billion euros ($6.1 billion) from earnings through 2010.

Yesterday, Tim Clark, president of Emirates, the biggest customer for the Airbus SAS's A380, said his airline is sending a team of auditors to the plane maker's factories to see if delivery of the superjumbo will be delayed for a fourth time.

Emirates Considers 747-800

Clark said the airline had no plans now to follow Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd., which postponed its order for the plane last week after Airbus said deliveries of the A380 would be delayed for a third time in 16 months to August 2008. Clark said he's considering the Boeing Co. 747-800, the newest version of the plane, to ``supplement'' the A380 order.

``If they are going to delay further we need to know because we can't afford to be let down again,'' Clark said in a phone interview from Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

On Oct 27, Emirates canceled a $4.2 billion order for 10 of Airbus's A340-600 model. The four-engine airplane is being beaten for business by Boeing's 777-300, which is more fuel efficient. Emirates had delayed the order in March to give Airbus more time to develop a better version of the A340.

Virgin Atlantic, controlled by U.K. billionaire Richard Branson, said on Oct. 26 that it's postponing the order for six A380s until 2013. The planes had been scheduled for delivery from late 2009, the airline said.

Disclosure of Difficulties in 2005

Airbus first disclosed difficulties with the A380 in 2005. Prior to today's announcement by Qantas, the plane maker had 159 orders from 16 customers for the aircraft, which has cost at least $13.5 billion to develop. The superjumbo has a range of 8,000 nautical miles and costs $282 million to $302 million each, based on catalog prices.

Qantas first placed its order for 12 of the superjumbos, with an option for another 12, in 2000. The carrier, which in August booked a gain of A$104 million ($79 million) in its full- year earnings on compensation for the delays, will receive its first A380 in August 2008, two years behind schedule.

``Our decision to increase our order has been made after an extensive review of the recent problems at Airbus and the delivery schedule delays of the A380,'' Dixon said in the statement today. ``We are convinced that these problems relate to industrialization issues at Airbus and will be remedied, and in no way relate to the technical capacity of the A380.''

The airline plans to use the 555-seat, double-decker planes for destinations including the U.S., the U.K., Europe and possibly the Middle East, according to its statement.

Airbus A330 Order

Meanwhile, Qantas expects to receive four of the 250-seat A330-200, which each cost between $152.7 million and $163 million based on list prices, from December 2007. It plans to use the plane, which has a range of 6,450 nautical miles (11,949 kilometers), to fill the capacity shortage from the A380 delay.

Qantas, which has a fleet of 219 planes, is counting on fuel-efficient aircraft such as the A380 and the 115 Boeing 787 aircraft it has on order, to cut costs as jet kerosene prices reach record levels.

``The Boeing 787 and the Airbus A380 both have up to 20 percent lower operating costs than existing aircraft and will form the nucleus of the fleets out to 2015 for Qantas and our low-cost airline Jetstar,'' Dixon said today.

The airline has also decided to buy five more Boeing 737- 800, with delivery starting from February 2008, Qantas said in today's statement. The single-aisle plane seats as many as 189 passengers and costs between $66 million and $75 million each based on list prices.

Qantas said the 737-800, along with its 33 existing aircraft of the same model, will be used to serve its domestic routes and to replace aging 737-400s, which will be sold, redeployed or converted to freighters.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 30, 2006)

Syscom, I agree with you regarding A320s built in PRC. However, the world is a changin'. Without policital clout, PRC won't allow aircraft to be sold in volume to the worlds largest potential market. All the airframers are doing this too. A shame really.


----------



## syscom3 (Nov 3, 2006)

I agree with this gentlemans assessment. Does Airbus have the resources to manage both the 380 and the 350? I would suspect at the moment, no.



> "The big issue is, do they have the engineering talent to deal with the launch of the A350 as they're dealing with the problems of the A380?"



Airbus tags more cash for A350 - Business - International Herald Tribune

TOULOUSE, France: Airbus plans to increase spending by 20 percent, to $12 billion, to develop its A350 jet, a long- range plane that would be made mainly of lightweight carbon fiber, two people with direct knowledge of the proposal said Friday.

The European plane maker, which is trailing Boeing in new orders this year, will present designs for the A350 XWB to its parent company, European Aeronautic Defense Space, on Tuesday, according to the people, who declined to be identified before an announcement.

The plane is the sixth attempt by Airbus to come up with a rival to Boeing's 787, which has won 402 orders and may help Boeing overtake Airbus as the world's largest maker of commercial planes. Airbus has struggled to develop its A380 superjumbo, now two years behind schedule and forecast to generate operating losses of €4.8 billion, or $6.1 billion, by 2010.

"They really don't have a choice about doing it, if they want to be competitive with Boeing over the long term," said Phil Finnegan, an analyst at Teal Group, a consulting company in Fairfax, Virginia. "The big issue is, do they have the engineering talent to deal with the launch of the A350 as they're dealing with the problems of the A380?"

In July, Airbus said it had scrapped earlier plans for an A350 based on an existing model and aimed to offer by October an all-new plane, with wings made from carbon fiber, that would cost $10 billion to develop.

The latest concept would be made 50 percent from carbon fiber to reduce weight and save fuel, which is the biggest expense for airlines after labor, the people said.

Boeing's plane, known as the Dreamliner, is 50 percent carbon fiber by weight and 20 percent more fuel-efficient than the planes it replaces, according to Boeing.

The 787 cost the plane maker and its partners $10 billion to develop, according to Paul Nisbet, an analyst at JSA Research in Newport, Rhode Island.

The new A350 XWB would not enter service until at least 2013, a year later than previously planned and five years after the 787 is expected to fly. Making a fuselage from carbon fiber composites will also make the plane more costly to develop, requiring new equipment and technology, the people said.

The A350 XWB would have 270 to 350 seats, depending on the model, and a range of 15,700 kilometers, or 9,800 miles, the people said. That compares with 210 to 330 seats on the 787 and a range of up to 16,300 kilometers.

Meanwhile, the A380's development cost has risen to $13.5 billion. Airbus expects to take €1.1 billion in charges this year because of penalty payments to airlines for late delivery and anticipated losses on some contracts.

EADS talks 'going well'

Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany said Friday that negotiations about new German investors for EADS were going well and that Berlin wanted to keep the French-German parity in the group, Reuters reported from Berlin.

But a statement issued by Merkel's office after she met with the EADS co- chiefs, Thomas Enders and Louis Gallois, gave no details.

"These negotiations are going well," Merkel said. "We want to send a clear signal that the German government is committed" to French-German parity.

Since EADS was created in 2000, it has maintained a balance between the French and Germans in its shareholder base and management. Berlin is trying to decide how to maintain German influence in EADS after DaimlerChrysler sells part of its stake, as expected.


----------



## syscom3 (Nov 5, 2006)

> didnt Airbus say not to long ago that an all composite structure was too risky?



Airbus considers composite fuselage

In what would be a radical change of course for the company, Airbus may switch to a composite fuselage for its next new jetliner.

It would mark the sixth time that Airbus has changed plans as it scrambles for the right airplane to not only challenge The Boeing Co.'s 787 Dreamliner but possibly leapfrog the 777. The two Boeing planes are dominating sales for jets that seat from about 250 to 350 passengers.

Airbus may present its latest A350 design to the board of its parent company, EADS, next week, according to a published report.

"If they are reconsidering the virtues of an all-composite tube (fuselage), that's a smart exercise," said Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis for the Teal Group, an industry consulting firm near Washington, D.C.

"They have to decide whether they believe composites is a killer technology," Aboulafia said. "If they believe that it is, then a metal-tubed A350 would be ambushed eventually by a 777 composite replacement."

Airbus has said it would aim the A350 at not only the 787 but the 777, a bigger plane that seats from 300 to 360 passengers, depending on the model.

Boeing's two-engine 777 has been dominating sales for jets its size the past few years. Airlines prefer it over the four-engine Airbus A340, which is less fuel-efficient and has a smaller cabin.

The older 777 has an aluminum fuselage, but a composite tail. The new 787 will be the world's first large passenger jet with an all-composite airframe, including fuselage. Boeing believes composites are the future of commercial jet making and has said it has made its last aluminum jetliner. Composites are stronger and lighter than metal and do not corrode. Among other benefits, the composite fuselage of the 787 will save airlines on maintenance and give passengers an improved cabin environment, according to Boeing.

Airbus, on the other hand, has said Boeing is pushing the technology envelope too far with the 787.

Earlier this year, Airbus redesigned the A350 after criticism from several airline and industry executives that its proposed plane would not be competitive against the 787.

At the Farnborough International Airshow in England in July, Airbus unveiled the redesigned jet, dubbed the A350 XWB (extra wide body). Airbus said then that the A350 would have a composite wing, but not a composite fuselage. Airbus said it would develop three versions of the A350, the first of which would not be ready for airline service until 2012.

But last week, Tim Clark, president of Emirates, an important Airbus customer, told reporters that the A350 XWB was still lacking.

"It has to do better than that," he said of Airbus.

Emirates has been considering either the A350 or 787 as it looks to place an order for as many as 100 midsize jets.

Two weeks ago, the respected online industry publication Air Transport World reported that Airbus was rethinking the A350 design to include a composite fuselage. It quoted "key" unnamed customers as telling Airbus that it had not yet done enough with the plane to combat the 787.

Bloomberg News reported Friday that Airbus has indeed decided to redesign the A350 to include more composite and will present the new design to the EADS board Tuesday. Bloomberg, quoting two unnamed sources, said the latest redesign will push the development costs of the A350 from $10 billion up to $12 billion. The changes will delay the jet's entry into service until at least 2013, Bloomberg quoted the sources as saying.

Boeing plans four versions of its 787, the first of which will enter service in 2008.

The European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co., the world's second-largest aerospace company after Boeing, has not yet approved development of the A350. It has its hands full trying to repair the damage from a series of embarrassing delays in the A380 program. EADS executives recently said they wanted to make sure there are enough engineers, and that EADS has the financial resources, to develop the A350, given the full-court press at Airbus to get the A380 problems fixed.

Industry analysts believe Airbus must develop the A350 or concede the important middle of the jetliner market to Boeing and its 787.

In his recent comments to reporters, Clark, the Emirates Airlines executive, said if Airbus does not come up with a competitive plane to counter Boeing's 787, "they'll be out of business."


----------



## twoeagles (Nov 7, 2006)

I see that FEDEX has cancelled their order for 10 Airbus and has ordered Boeing. An uptick for FEDEX, but I am pretty much a snotty "buy American"
sort of guy. You just can't beat a Boeing (and I am a Lockheed engineer!)


----------



## syscom3 (Nov 7, 2006)

Here you go......

Hmmmm........ Just like the L-1011 nearly destroyed Lockheed, so may the A380.

Airbus loses its first A380 customer - Business - International Herald Tribune

FedEx backs out on 10 superjumbos worth up to $3 billion
By Carter Dougherty / International Herald TribunePublished: November 7, 2006

FRANKFURT: FedEx, the American freight and logistics company, on Tuesday canceled an order for 10 Airbus A380s, becoming the first customer to abandon the superjumbo jet in the wake of the production delays that have shaken the European company.

The order will instead go to its American rival Boeing, which will supply FedEx with 15 Boeing 777 Freighters, a plane also designed for long-haul cargo flights.

Frederick Smith, chairman and chief executive of FedEx, specifically cited the recent decision by Airbus to delay delivery of the superjumbo jet amid production bottlenecks as the reason for the cancellation.

"This is a disaster for Airbus," said Doug McVitie, managing director of Arran Aerospace, a consultancy in Dinan, France. "The fact that it is a freighter and not a passenger version does not minimize the impact in any way."

FedEx cancels A380 orders, citing delays Though the industry has been rife with speculation about possible cancellations of A380 deliveries, FedEx's decision is nonetheless a jolt to the Airbus order book at a time when it can ill afford such losses. The company has also been jousting with its largest customer, Emirates Airlines, which last month sent teams to Toulouse, France, and Hamburg, the main Airbus production sites, to review its orders for 43 planes. A second team of Emirates engineers is expected to arrive in Toulouse later this month.

Two weeks ago, Virgin Atlantic Airways announced that it would postpone by four years an order for six A380s from Airbus, becoming the first airline to step back from its commitment to the troubled plane and signaling the potential for more trouble

Until FedEx canceled, Airbus had 159 firm orders for the A380. That number has not changed in about a year, making the FedEx decision a painful blow, analysts said.

With Airbus in the deepest crisis of its 36-year history, some analysts have said they believe it will be difficult for the company to obtain many more new orders for the large plane. Airbus has said it expects to sell 751 planes during the life of the program.

"Global demand for air cargo and express services continues to grow rapidly and FedEx has made significant investments in our network to meet customers' needs and fulfill our business objectives," Smith said in announcing the cancellation. "Therefore, it was necessary and prudent for us to acquire the Boeing 777 Freighter."

Airbus, the main subsidiary of European Aeronautic Space and Defense, said it regretted the FedEx decision. "That said, we respect their need to address capacity growth," an Airbus spokesman, David Voskuhl, said.

The passenger version of the A380 lists for about $300 million, but that does not necessarily mean Airbus will lose $3 billion from the cancellation. Freighters are sold for less because their interiors are less elaborate, and the FedEx order was placed at the lower rates that would have prevailed in 2001.

Boeing, for its part, hailed a new success for its 777, the world's longest- range twin engine aircraft, which will replace FedEx's aging fleet of McDonnell Douglas-11F airplanes.

"We're looking forward to working with FedEx on this new chapter in our relationship," said Ray Conner, vice president of sales for the Americas at Boeing Commercial Airplanes.

The order is worth up to $3.6 billion for Boeing based on the list price of the 777, double that if FedEx exercises options it has also obtained to purchase another 15 planes, according to a spokesman, Bob Saling. Discounts on the list price are common.

FedEx announced plans to buy the freighter version of the A380 for its FedEx Express subsidiary in January 2001 after a two-year study of the company's long-term needs for long-range jumbo aircraft. At that time, FedEx chose the A380 over a model of the Boeing 747, saying that no other plane "met our anticipated demands in the international air cargo market as efficiently."

But the A380 delays have now led FedEx to choose the 777 freighter, which was not available in 2001.

Losing an A380 cargo order was particularly painful for Airbus, analysts said. The freighter version, which has a capacity of nearly 40,000 cubic feet and a maximum payload of 330,000 pounds, had the potential to be a major money maker for Airbus, McVitie said. Lacking a complex, customized interior, its manufacturing costs are well below those of the passenger version.

The cancellation means that Airbus now has outstanding orders for just 15 freighter versions of the A380. United Parcel Service has ordered 10 of the planes in 2005 and has options to buy 10 more. The remaining five will go to International Lease Finance, a California- based aircraft leasing company.


----------



## syscom3 (Nov 10, 2006)

Much-delayed superjumbo A380 on sale now for carriers that can wait

Troubled Airbus jet could be bargain - Aviation - MSNBC.com

By Karen West
MSNBC contributor
Updated: 3:54 p.m. PT Nov 9, 2006

The biggest financial crisis in Airbus’ 36-year history could be a boon to commercial airlines.

After breaking its delivery dates three times on its super-jumbo A380 jet, Airbus sales executives are courting customers all over again to keep them from dumping the new model.

Even though the plane is overweight and wrought with production snafus, some industry insiders say airlines should think twice before sending the superjumbo packing.

If they’re patient and don’t urgently need the airplanes, airlines could end up getting "the deal of the century," one analyst said.

“Airbus has to go to every customer hat in hand, get down on their knees and say, What can I do to make it right?’’ said Edmund Greenslet, publisher of Airline Monitor, a trade publication. “One way to make it right is to make it cheaper.”

In the meantime, A380 customers, many of whom already received 30 to 40 percent discounts for being the first to sign up for the 555-seat "cruise ship of the skies," are demanding financial compensation for three rounds of delivery delays since June 2005.

In just 19 months, the giant, double-decker passenger plane has gone from being Europe’s crowning engineering achievement to what some view as a white elephant that is two years behind schedule and expected to cost the company billions in lost profits.

“My advice to airlines would be don’t bail out. Stay on board and use your leverage to get all the bells and whistles you want for free,’’ Greenslet said.

Aviation consultant Scott Hamilton agrees, saying airlines would be crazy to cancel A380 orders today.

“By the time the airlines get through raking Airbus over the coals, we wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if the launch-order A380 pricing wound up being in the $100 million range,’’ Hamilton wrote in a recent report to clients. “Getting the A380 for this little amount would be the deal of the century.’’

The A380 has a list price of $300 million, although airlines rarely pay the list price for new aircraft.

While deep discounts are expected on the A380, not all airlines can afford to wait it out, noted Forecast International aerospace analyst Raymond Jaworowski.

FedEx Corp., one of Airbus’s most loyal customers, this week canceled its order for 10 of the A380 freighter models because of the delivery delays. It turned to rival Boeing Co. for 15 Boeing 777s because they could be delivered more quickly. The 777 has a list price of $178 million to $240 million, depending on the version.

Airbus’ 15 remaining freighter orders — 10 from United Parcel Service Inc. and five from International Lease Finance Corp. — still need to be “reconfirmed’’ and are in the “cancellation zone,’’ according to executives from Airbus' parent, European Aeronautic Defense and Space Co.

UPS and ILFC reportedly are holding onto their orders while they weigh their options with Airbus, which has blamed wiring difficulties for its production delays. 

EADS officials last month estimated that the A380 delays will cut $6.1 billion from earnings through 2010. This week the company reported a third-quarter loss of $245 million, largely because of the production delays. Officials have said the company will not make a profit on the A380 until it has sold 420 units, up from last year’s forecast of 270.

That could take decades, although some analysts point out that the 747 jumbo jet, which nearly bankrupted Boeing, also took many years to become profitable.

Without FedEx, Airbus still has 149 orders for the A380 from 15 customers, including Emirates, Singapore Airlines Ltd. and Australia's Qantas Airways Ltd.

Richard Aboulafia, vice president of the Teal Group, an industry consulting business in Fairfax, Va., says the A380 debacle casts doubts on the company’s ability to fund new planes, such as the A350 — a new widebody jet designed to compete with Boeing’s fast-selling 787 and 777.

“That’s the airplane they should have built from the word go,’’ Aboulafia said, who added that the A380 “should never have been born.” 

Paul Nisbet of JSA Research in Newport, R.I., said Airbus in time will earn back respect and orders for the A380 by demonstrating the operation and viability of the aircraft.

“Eventually it will be an operational success,’’ Nisbet said. “How long it will take or if they ever achieve economic success remains to be seen.”

A decision on whether to go ahead with the proposed long-range A350 is expected in the next few weeks.

Without an A350 launch, Airbus will soon have nothing competitive to sell in the crucial 200- to 400-seat segment, Aboulafia said. “Getting the A380 back on track after a two-year delay won’t save the company from marginalization without the A350.”

In wake of the latest delays, Virgin Atlantic Airways postponed delivery of its first A380s until 2013. Emirates, the Dubai-based airline that is the program’s biggest customer with 45 planes on order, said it was sending an audit team to France to check on the latest delivery schedule. Its first A380 is expected to be delivered in August 2008 — a time when the airline originally was supposed to have 18.

Meanwhile, Qantas, which has already been compensated for the delays, recently ordered eight A380 superjumbos on top of the dozen it had already said it would buy. It was the first A380 order this year.

Qantas officials said they had negotiated an "attractive package" for the additional jets. It also ordered four A330s to help fill the gap left by the two-year delay to the A380 delivery timetable.

“I wouldn’t be surprised if Airbus threw in those planes (A330s) practically for free,’’ Greenslet said. “The pricing power has shifted from the seller to the buyer. Airlines can more or less dictate a price right now, and Airbus is in no position to haggle.”


----------



## syscom3 (Nov 12, 2006)

> Not only is Airbus going to have to devote a large ammount of resources to develope the -350 and -380, but they will also have some very difficult political choices to make with the Chinese and Russians. Airbus might need to seel their souls to those two countries just to survive. At least Boeing outsourced the more expensive parts of the 787 to countries that have similar economies like the US.




The American Thinker

The past week, which saw Europe celebrating the triumph of America’s Democrats, produced more bad news for Airbus. Europe’s champion “social enterprise,” intended to serve the interests of more than just shareholders, and its chosen instrument rival to America in the strategically-important aerospace industry, has almost no room for error. If it succeeds in maintaining its position as a full line rival to Boeing, it will represent a brilliant and desperate achievement.

In order to remain a viable competitor in the production of advanced airliners, Airbus must thread a needle. Everything must go according to plan, and self-serving interest groups and leaders must be willing to compromise in order to assure the survival of the enterprise. Costs must be dramatically cut by dropping 80% of existing suppliers (mostly European firms), as announced on Monday and concentrating work in the hands of firms who can cut costs by a substantial amount. The strength of the euro against the dollar has severely handicapped Airbus, so it has announced it is seeking low wage suppliers located in dollar zone countries. This would exclude France and Germany.

Russian aerospace and Airbus

Russia is emerging as a key player in Airbus, with China striving to keep its own hand in the pot as well. Both nations can provide very low cost labor compared to Western Europe, and the former USSR aviation engineering establishment contains many talented engineers hungry for work. A month ago I reported on the growing ties between Airbus and Russia, including a substantial capital investment in Airbus by a state-controlled Russian bank.

This week, those ties started to bear fruit. Russian airline Aeroflot defaulted on its order for 20 Boeing 787 Dreamliners, the hot-selling new generation airplane for which Airbus must engineer a rival, or else risk losing the biggest market segment of all: fuel-efficient medium-sized, long range airliners. Airbus has been under pressure to announce the formal launch of its rival A350 XWB model. Russia clearly wants a hand in its development, and wants Aeroflot to swing as many orders as possible to the new airplane as soon as Airbus formally decides to commit its resources to the program.

Industry observers noted that on its own merits, Aeroflot’s decision made no sense. Other leading airlines like British Airways and Singapore Airlines have already started vying for the delivery slots opened up by Aeroflot (the 787 is sold out through about 2012 at current rates of production). Moreover, the price agreed to by Aeroflot is thought to be substantially less than any new customer would pay. In effect, it is giving up a discounted price on a highly saleable airplane. Bargaining leverage with Airbus must be worth more to the Kremlin leaders behind this decision.

If Airbus follows the practices of the Japanese and of Boeing, a substantial amount of engineering will be outsourced, along with the actual physical components and systems to be supplied by the new contractors, including Russian and Chinese suppliers. This makes quality control and engineering liaison critical. Airbus has had much less practice at this than Boeing, which has very successfully outsourced major critical components of its jetliners, notably to Japanese suppliers highly skilled in the delicate technologies involved in manufacturing composite-based components, up to and including fuselage sections and even wing components.

Normally, much time and energy are required to work out relationships satisfactory to both sides when critical engineering responsibility is transferred to suppliers. But Airbus does not have the leisure Boeing enjoyed, as it gradually outsourced more work to its key suppliers. Everything must go right for Airbus, and it must go right quickly, if the A350 XWB model is to be produced in time to contest the market with Boeing.

Balancing Russia (and China) versus France (and Germany)

President Chirac announced he will visit Airbus HQ in Toulouse next Tuesday to “find solutions.” M. Chirac has so far not notably shown himself interested in solutions which cost French workers their jobs. Germany, for its part, does not want to see jobs lost in Germany, where the A320 is assembled, and where many suppliers may well be cut off in favor of Russian and other low wage suppliers.

Airbus chief M. Gallois, the skillful former president of SNCF, the French railway, will have his work cut our for himself, persuading France and Germany to go along with job cuts. His major leverage comes from a threat to cancel the A350 XWB. But such an abdication would cripple Airbus’ efforts to remain a full-line supplier to its airline customers.

Airbus recycled news of the big Chinese order for its aging A320 single plane, in order to garner at least some positive headlines, such as this - “Airbus Gains Ground.” In return for the massive order, China will host an assembly line for the A320 jet, This will not contribute to steady employment in either Toulouse or Hamburg, where the 320s are currently assembled.

The A380 freighter program at risk

The real order book news is terrible. The very first outright cancellation of an order for the A380 came as Fedex cancelled its order for 10 superjumbo freighters. The remaining two customers, UPS (10 orders) and leasing firm International Lease Finance Corporation (5) have not yet reconfirmed their orders, and if they do not renew, the program will be dropped, costing the company 25 firm orders. While it would save a lot of engineering resources, this would leave the large freighter market securely in Boeing’s hands.

Airbus can ill afford to concede any important segments to Boeing. That is where profits are richest, and Boeing continues to prosper while Airbus shows definite signs of a financial pinch. The financial director of parent EADS put it this way,

“Airbus will have to meet cost-cutting targets if it is to “deliver on all programs at the same time….”

Boeing ramps up

Meanwhile, facing extremely strong demand for its 777 twin jet medium-large long range airliner, Boeing is taking the step of changing its assembly procedures in order to ramp up production by as much as 20% or more. The 777 will be manufactured on a moving assembly line, just like Henry Ford’s Model T, albeit it at a slower pace (1.6 inches per minute).

The moving assembly line serves to prompt workers as to the necessary time to be done with each stage of work for which they are responsible. The initial pace, timed to existing achievements in speed, can gradually be increased, as workers master their processes more fully, and as they focus more intently due to the prompting of the physical movement of the airplane. It has been used before to excellent effect by Boeing and other airplane manufacturers.

The 777 freighter, incidentally, is what FedEx is purchasing in place of its cancelled A380 freighter order. Other airlines, facing delays in their expected delivery dates for 380s, have also been ordering 777s. Boeing must be making substantial profits on it.

Pricing pressure on Airbus

The final and perhaps most costly bit of bad news for Airbus is the outbreak of open talk about the heavy discounting it is employing to “move iron” as they say in the airliner business. Qantas, when it re-upped for more 380 options, boasted of the “attractive package” it received, a euphemism for steep discounts. Now, the press is reporting that customers which ordered the old minimally-upgraded A350 design (which was dropped) will be receiving the new version, the XWB, at the old price they negotiated for the older model plane.

The losses per XWB airplane could be very substantial. The exact pricing figures are a closely-held secret, but it was understood that launch customers for the old A350 received deep discounts on an airplane that was to require only a billion euros or so to develop. The new XWB variant will require perhaps 10 billion euros or more. When one is losing money on discounts and is late to the market by a matter of multiple years, it is very hard to make up for low prices on volume

For the A380, it may be even worse.

“Airbus has to go to every customer hat in hand, get down on their knees and say, What can I do to make it right?’’ said Edmund Greenslet, publisher of Airline Monitor, a trade publication. “One way to make it right is to make it cheaper.”

In the meantime, A380 customers, many of whom already received 30 to 40 percent discounts for being the first to sign up for the 555-seat “cruise ship of the skies,” are demanding financial. [....]

“By the time the airlines get through raking Airbus over the coals, we wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if the launch-order A380 pricing wound up being in the $100 million range,’’ Hamilton wrote in a recent report to clients. “Getting the A380 for this little amount would be the deal of the century.’’

The A380 has a list price of $300 million, although airlines rarely pay the list price for new aircraft.


----------



## syscom3 (Nov 12, 2006)

A money-losing quarter

Airbus also announced a net loss for its third quarter, due to write-offs. Surprisingly, the news of the loss contained actual good news: outside of the write-offs on the A380, the rest of the company is moderately healthy. Defense aviation is a strong point, in particular.

However, depending on whether or not the company decides to go ahead with the A350 XWB program, as much as billion euros more in write-offs could be faced in the fourth quarter.

EADS could take A350-related charges of as much as €800 million (US$1 billion) in the fourth quarter, Ring warned, depending on the decision it takes on the program’s future.

Even worse, however, is this small bit of verbiage buried in the company’s official announcement.

As already announced, EADS will not issue an updated 2006 outlook until further notice.

Matters are clearly very dicey at Airbus. It faces incompatible demands from the marketplace versus powerful state actors it needs to placate, but who are not much interested in compromises that harm their own interests.

M. Gallois, bonne chance!

Thoams Lifson is the editor and publisher of American Thinker.


----------



## v2 (Feb 28, 2007)

Bad news: *Airbus to announce major job cuts*

PARIS, France (Reuters) -- Planemaker Airbus will announce on Wednesday plans to cut 10,000 jobs in four European countries, but will force contractors to share the pain of cuts which could provoke labor unrest, industry sources said.

more: Airbus to announce major job cuts - CNN.com
( cnn )


----------



## Matt308 (Feb 28, 2007)

And here is how every A380 interior will not look like.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 28, 2007)

I sure would like to fly on that particular one though!


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 28, 2007)

Yeah, if they were all set up like that, it would make commercial flying more enjoyable again.


----------



## Matt308 (Feb 28, 2007)

Think Greyhound bus with the scum of the earth as passengers. Now include queueing for 3 hours on top of it between taxi-check in-security-tram-boarding-deplaning-tram-luggage-rental bus-rental desk-hotel parking valet-hotel checkin-repeat. That is much more realistic.


----------



## Erich (Feb 28, 2007)

have you guys seen the big boy 1000 passenger fixed wing that Boeing is putting together as response to the Airbus ?


----------



## Matt308 (Feb 28, 2007)

Yeah the wind tunnel scale version of the flying wing. Boeing has been floating that one in the curtains for years and years. But its radical departure from the existing tube-wings-tail model is likely not going to be a seller in todays near future.


----------



## Erich (Feb 28, 2007)

I'm not too sure about that . . . . ............. obviously big bucks is a factor


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 1, 2007)

I atleast would like to see a flying prototype.


----------



## Erich (Mar 1, 2007)

I was sent sometime ago a photo of the Boeing on the flight line but with double the engines that is in Matts pic. whether it is a reality now and still going through the "bugs" stages am not sure

E `


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 1, 2007)

Ive seen drawings of what you are talking about Erich.


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 2, 2007)

Just saw that UPS made it official: they cancelled their order for 10 A380's...


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 2, 2007)

And Singapore has renegotiated their deal too.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 3, 2007)

Does not look good.


----------



## trackend (Mar 4, 2007)

I cant imagine the chaos thats going to happen at airport luggage handling when an A380 disgourges all its passengers at once It'll take hours just to wait for you case to get off loaded, At Stansted my longest wait so far has been 2 hours and that was just off a 737 from Barcelona (the flight was quicker than the luggage handling)


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 4, 2007)

Damn I have never waited that long. I would honestly say the latest I have ever waited was about 30 minutes and that was in Atlanta after a flight from Stuttgart, Germany.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 5, 2007)

30 minutes!! I have been below the 30 minute mark on only VERY rare occasions or when flying commuter aircraft.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 5, 2007)

...oh, also read that A380 will not be flying into LAX. Rather there will be what was stated as simultaneous landing at O'Hare and LaGuardia. Interesting change there.


----------



## v2 (Mar 19, 2007)

A380 on trans-Atlantic sales pitch-
A380 on trans-Atlantic sales pitch - CNN.com


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 19, 2007)

A380 took off from Frankfurt to fly to New York today.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 19, 2007)

And I read that LAX officials complained so loudly that it will also be landing at LAX today. Apparently did so about 4 or so hours ago. LAX officials were PO'd that they had spent millions in taxiway improvements and gate infrastructure and then threatened with cancellation. They noted the dual gate ramp alone cost $9M.


----------



## syscom3 (Mar 19, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> And I read that LAX officials complained so loudly that it will also be landing at LAX today. Apparently did so about 4 or so hours ago. LAX officials were PO'd that they had spent millions in taxiway improvements and gate infrastructure and then threatened with cancellation. They noted the dual gate ramp alone cost $9M.



The way the -380 saga is unfolding, that gate might not be used for a few more years.

I loved listening to an Airbus official saying that the future of air travel is through a hub and spoke topology.

Hehehehehehhehehe


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 20, 2007)

Unless we build more runways, for large aircraft, that may well be true. If the VLJ business model catches on, things may be different. But then handling US continental airspace populated with a commensurate amount of VLJs to current revenue passenger miles will break the back of the national airspace infrastructure.

I still say invest in high speed rail. Our system is based upon 60s technology and has no room for growth.


----------



## Glider (Mar 20, 2007)

Very similar arguments were put forward when the 747 started operating and they land in most international airports


----------



## syscom3 (Mar 20, 2007)

Glider said:


> Very similar arguments were put forward when the 747 started operating and they land in most international airports



Times have changed between 1968 and 2008.


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 21, 2007)

Did anyone see the near disastrous landing at LAX? It gave me a cold shiver when the pilot banged that rudder hard over trying to recover!!! Do the main gear trucks castor like a B-52???


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 21, 2007)

Do you know if there is video of the landing. They did an interview with the pilot when he was over the atlantic and he was talking about how it was a dream to fly. I would love to see the video of the near mishap though.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 21, 2007)

twoeagles said:


> Did anyone see the near disastrous landing at LAX? It gave me a cold shiver when the pilot banged that rudder hard over trying to recover!!! Do the main gear trucks castor like a B-52???



That;s a good question twoeagles. I do know on the 777 that the some of the rearwheels of the maingear bogies are steerable to assist in turning radius and prevent tire scrubbing. I'll look into it, but would suspect that the A380 makes use of the same technology simply because taxi way issues were so important to fielding the beast.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 21, 2007)

Here ya go...

From aerospace-technology.com

Goodrich has been contracted to supply the two six-wheel under-fuselage landing gear and the two four-wheeled wing-mounted landing gear. The wing-mounted landing gear is slightly forward of the fuselage-mounted gear. The wheels on the main landing gear are fitted with carbon brakes.

The twin wheel nose landing gear is supplied by Messier-Dowty. The steering control is via the nose gear and via the rear axle of the fuselage landing gear. The gear allows u-turn manoeuvres on a 60m-wide runway.

The aircraft can manoeuvre on 23m-wide taxiways and 45m-wide runways. The French aerospace company Latecoere, based in Toulouse, developed the External and Taxi Aid Camera System (ETACS).

And here is some effects of tire scrubbing on taxi tests

Airliners.net Civil Aviation: A380 Main Landing Gear


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 21, 2007)

...and here's the landing at LAX. Nothing looks out of the ordinary from this video with perhaps the exception that the outboard thrust reversers were not engaged. And likely that was done on purpose since they hang over the edge of the runway threshold.


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfKEwGyCMEA_


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 21, 2007)

The video I saw on the news (NBC) was shot from a helicopter as the aspect was looking down, and it appeared as though he was crabbed into a bad crosswind when he touched, skidding for a short distance and not aligned with runway heading. He corrected very qucikly, to be sure, but it was very apparent...Maybe I am confusing it with the New York arrival? I don't think so.

Watch very carefully the end of this sequence:


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShK0JsTccDM_


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 21, 2007)

Vertical stab does make large movements, but nothing drastic. Was he not on centerline?


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 21, 2007)

I need to search and see if MSNBC has their video. He looked left of center with noticable left yaw...But I may be off base on exactly where he was laterally on the runway.


----------



## spitfire101 (Mar 21, 2007)

i got to see the airbus flying!!!!! it flew right to jfk airport and i saw it before it landed here in NYC, and it was huge


----------



## bomber (Mar 22, 2007)

Shhhhhhhhhh.. keep it under your hats for the UK only residents

AIRBUS A380 TO FLY OVER DERBY IN TRIBUTE TO ROLLS-ROYCE

An Airbus A380, powered by four of our Trent 900 engines, is due to make a low level pass over the Derby facilities on Monday 26th March. This has been arranged by Airbus as a tribute and thank you to Rolls-Royce employees.

This is a rare opportunity to see the A380 flying in all its glory, and to see the Trent 900 engines in action. Rolls-Royce Chief Test Pilot Phill O’Dell will be at the controls of the A380 as it does a low approach over East Midlands Airport, and then completes a fly past of our Derby facilities.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 22, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Vertical stab does make large movements, but nothing drastic. Was he not on centerline?



Hard to tell in these videos. He might not have been centerline. Does not look like anything was too out of the ordinary though, atleast in these videos.


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 22, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Hard to tell in these videos. He might not have been centerline. Does not look like anything was too out of the ordinary though, atleast in these videos.



Yeah I didn't see to much wrong with the landing, a little rudder perhaps just before the touchdown but other than that, nothing much from what I could see.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 22, 2007)

Thought you might enjoy these. Some of the schematics are interesting in and of themselves.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 22, 2007)

...and some more...


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 22, 2007)

...and some more.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 22, 2007)

That is just crazy!


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 23, 2007)

Yeah, she really is huge!


----------

