It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wow, at the risk of starting another holywar...

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 01:36 AM
link   
Boeing has been *really* busy lately with orders all of a sudden, does anyone know what's going on to spur these? Are they telling customers 'buy now if you want 787 goodness' or what? Here's a summary:

[feb 4 reports]

Japan Airlines has picked the Boeing 737 Next Generation and will place an order for 30 aircraft to include the 737-700, 737-800 and 737-900 versions. JAL will also take options on 10 additional aircraft. Delivery is expected to begin in April 2006.

Gol Linhas Aereas Inteligentes has added an option on 20 additional Boeing 737-800s. These aircraft are to be delivered between 2006 and 2010 and are in additon to an order for 43 B737s placed in May of last year.

Boeing has a preliminary agreement to sell up to 6 737-800s to Buraq Air of Lybia. The deal, expected to be signed soon, calls for 3 firm aircraft and 3 options for the airline based in Tripoli.

[feb 2]
All Nippon announced its fleet plans for the coming 3 years and beyond that with the reduction of aircraft types. Amongst others ANA plans to introduce 10 new Boeing 777-300ERs up from the planned 6 to be used mostly on North American routes. As a result the airline will order 2 more B777-300ERs and convert 767-300ER orders. ANA is also considering reopening its Chicago routes as well as others that were closed and is looking at new routes to China




posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 02:51 AM
link   
Airbus is doing a better job of making planes, but Boeing sells more.. I don't get it.

I think part of it is bribery, extortion, whatever you want to call it. Boeing is the flagship of the American aero industry, as such it benefits from the American goverments strong arm tactics world-wide.

Wait another few years, the 'Dreamliner' or whatever it's called will fall flat on its face in head to head competition with the A-380. Boeing will still have to fill orders, despite rising costs and decaying infrastructure. I predict Boeing's insolvency after China demands last years contracts filled at agreed upon prices, after costs make those prices impossible to maintain. We'll see though, in a couple of years the state of the union, and correspondingly the state of Boeing, should be painfully clear one way or another.

Either us doomsayers will have to get real work, or we'll finally get to do a happy dance and waggle our fingers in the faces of the uber-patriots who see no evil. I don't care either way.



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 03:17 AM
link   
Wyrdeone - the dreamiline or 787 wont compete with the a-380. its not meant to, isnt in the same size class, and fills a different functon.
The a-380 has no competition because no one else is interested in building a super jumbo.



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Airbus is doing a better job of making planes, but Boeing sells more.. I don't get it.

I think part of it is bribery, extortion, whatever you want to call it. Boeing is the flagship of the American aero industry, as such it benefits from the American goverments strong arm tactics world-wide.

Wait another few years, the 'Dreamliner' or whatever it's called will fall flat on its face in head to head competition with the A-380. Boeing will still have to fill orders, despite rising costs and decaying infrastructure. I predict Boeing's insolvency after China demands last years contracts filled at agreed upon prices, after costs make those prices impossible to maintain. We'll see though, in a couple of years the state of the union, and correspondingly the state of Boeing, should be painfully clear one way or another.

Either us doomsayers will have to get real work, or we'll finally get to do a happy dance and waggle our fingers in the faces of the uber-patriots who see no evil. I don't care either way.

yeah i agree wth mwn1331
and i think its the opposite, boeing planes have better fuel consumtion ,lower noise levels, shorter take of runs,shorter landing runs, the flaps on the wings create less dragg and they are easyer to service.
but airbus is overtaking boeing and they have more orders.

i found this out on the boeing web site and about 3 book and a school maths book about sound levels.



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 03:52 AM
link   
www.aircraft-info.net...
According to this webpage and all other info not put out by Boeing, the A380 is superior in every way. More efficient, uses normal runways, less fuel per passenger, less noise, the only drawback is it uses larger terminals that accomodate more passengers.

mwm
Boeing started designing the Dreamliner after Airbus announced the A380. Boeing started shopping around its designs 12 months later, targetting the same markets and the same customers as Airbus. I'd say that's competition. The fact that Boeing didn't even have enough money for a working prototype tells you they're desperate for contracts. They were litterally going to foreign offices, with glossy photos of what the plane was going to look like, trying to sell people dozens of Dreamliners based on an artists concept sketch. That's a little sketchy.. heh heh

That pun was intended, sorry.



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Wyrd one - Again what part of the a-380 and 787 are different sizes with different functins do you not understand?
They reflect the different visions each company has as to the future of airtravel
The a-380 is meant to be used in a hub to hub system where passenges first fly to a major airport, board the a-380, fly to another major aiport and the if necessary fly to a smaller on on a smaller airline
the 787 is designed for direct flghts from small to mid size regonal airports directly to other small to mid size regional airports wth no connections.
two different planes, two different operatng profiles, two different markets.

What you are stateing is like trying to state a semi truck is in competition with a minivan.



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 04:02 AM
link   
I'm talking about general competition between Boeing and Airbus for the same air travel dollars. Relax sparky, no need to get snippy. The original post wasn't even about the 787.



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 04:14 AM
link   
They are buying the friendship and protection by american government for various reasons:

Libya wants to get out of the terrorist corner, shaked hands with blair after wich oilcontracts with anglo/american companies were quickly signed and now the boeing order will give more "depth" to that friendship, not that we really Love Khadaffi or vice versa , but in world scrambling for oil, we can't be too picky


Japan feels troubled by North Korea and also the growing chinese economy, this needs to be counterbalanced by supporting american economy/interests.

While politcs and money were always closely related , what makes the Bush administration unique is that it is perceived as primarely driven by company-interest and public interest seem to have taken a backseat.


[edit on 4-2-2005 by Countermeasures]



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 04:20 AM
link   
since when is correcting ignorant statements via an expositon of facts getting snippy?
Or are yo just upset that you were wrong?
Also can you back up your statements that being has a "decaying infrastructure"
Or that it is nearing"insolvency"?
because accordng to its legally required financial statement even despite a 44 cent per share charge boeing still increased both revenue and profits year over year in 2003
www.boeing.com...



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 04:53 AM
link   
Ignorant statements? I have several friends who work at United and Boeing here in the states. I have never seen them so depressed about the state of their beloved companies. The government bailed them out with tax dollars, and they still laid off a buttload of employees. They're greedy, archaic, and now that Airbus has ARRIVED for real, they're dinosaurs waiting to die. IMO.

eatthestate.org...

www.cnn.com...

seattlepi.nwsource.com...

executivecaliber.ws...

www.csmonitor.com...

As far as decaying infrastructure, Boeing has a number of relatively new production plants in the states that can only make conventional planes. Boeing itself still holds its planes together with rivets, which are not cost effective to install or maintain, not to mention dangerous to passengers. The sonic cruiser was scrapped because nobody wanted to buy them and Boeing executives couldn't justify retooling all their old production lines for a new concept. The technology utilized by Airbus, electric welds and composite sheets, is far superior and less susceptible to 'shrinkage' in value. 40 years from now Boeing plants will be useful for little more than producing ancient, technologically inferior planes. Airbus plants by comparison will still be 'modern' in their capabilities.



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 05:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
I think part of it is bribery, extortion, whatever you want to call it. Boeing is the flagship of the American aero industry, as such it benefits from the American goverments strong arm tactics world-wide.



The government bailed them out with tax dollars,


Oh how unfair, Boeing gets help from the U.S. government.

In case you didnt't know, Airbus recieves more than $15 billion from European governments. Most of which is considered illegal under global trade rules.
seattlepi.nwsource.com...



[edit on 4-2-2005 by LeftBehind]



posted on Feb, 4 2005 @ 05:08 AM
link   
A couple of things....

The 7E7/787 is pitched at the longrange market, London to Sydney, London to Hongkong etc, using the Direct Route method.

The A380-800 is currently pitched at the same market using the Hub and Spoke method. Why? Because capacity at these airports for longhaul flights is beginning to exceed that which can be provided with current longhaul aircraft. Its not a case of forcing passengers to fly to a Hub airport and change aircraft, the demand alreadsy exists at these airports.

(Little anecdote from me here about the hub and spoke system. I recently booked a flight to Vancouver, BC from London, UK. Every airline except for one wanted to fly me to the US where I had to change aircraft once or twice before flying on to Vancouver. Why?! Oh, and I refuse to visit the US, so I had to take the one airline that flew direct, and surprisingly enough, it was the cheapest! So, if you ever want to fly cheap, go to flyzoom.com)

Airbus already has an aircraft in the market which the 7E7/787 is aimed at, and its this aircraft that the 7E7/787 is competing against. Which one? The A340 of course. It has a comparable range (I think its even got a few hundred miles on the 7E7/787) and a larger passenger load.

Taken from a previous post of mine:

747-400ER (13,500km carrying 420 passengers)
777ER (13,500km range carrying 365 passengers)
7E7 (15,350Km carrying 250 passengers)
A340 (15,750km carrying 313 passengers)

This data is verifiable at Boeing and Airbus websites, and many other independant sites.

The A340 has more passenger capacity, and 400mile extra range. What does the 7E7 have? economy.

After some googling, the list price of a 7E7 is around $120million, while the list price of a A340 -600 is around $100million. Airlines only really like keeping aircraft for 7 - 10 years from new, so is the 7E7 efficient enough to save teh company $20million over that time period while carrying less passengers? I have no idea.

With the announcement of the A350, Boeing now has 2 direct competition aircraft. It could get hairy.

Personally I just think that large number of orders on both Airbus and Boeing sides means we have hit one of those points where a lot of airlines realise its more financially viable to buy new aircraft than maintain their current ones. This happens every few decades.



posted on Feb, 8 2005 @ 05:50 AM
link   
"W"WyrdeOne Ignorant statements? I have several friends who work at United and Boeing here in the states. I have never seen them so depressed about the state of their beloved companies. The government bailed them out with tax dollars, and they still laid off a buttload of employees. They're greedy, archaic, and now that Airbus has ARRIVED for real, they're dinosaurs waiting to die. IMO.

from above

i too know people who work at boeing and my father used to work there in the 60's, however since i am old enough to remember the early 70's here's a sign from then




this was a sign on the way out of seattle in oct of 71 when boeing laid off more than 30k people. and they are still here and will be in the future. oh they may not need as many people to build a plane as before but they will still be building planes in the seattle/everett area for a long time to come




[edit on 8-2-2005 by bigx01]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join