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.

 

Airbus to make history?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Hi there - just saw this and thought that you guys might be interested.........

Should put the cat among the pigeons


www.guardian.co.uk...

Interesting. Would this be an attempt by the administration to screw Boeing down to a low price without even really ever giving Airbus a chance? Or will Airbus be about to make history?




posted on Jan, 27 2006 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Despite the fact that Airbus now has partners and a sizeable operation in the USA and despite the corruption seen in the earlier phase of this with Boeing I would be astounded if the USAF went Airbus on this.

I suppose you can never say never (well, not at least until the matter is settled either way
) but I'd say it was unlikely in the absolute extreme.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 05:31 AM
link   
Lol, my post "Go get um Airbus" was removed. Nice unbiased board.

No, it is only fair that Airbus is allowd to bid for US contracts; Many of the US's military programs get govenment funding (F-15, F-16, F-18, F-35..... ) and all the Airbus nations let them compete against home products -the US has adopted an aggressive export strategy (Lavi is probably worst case example) for years.



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 05:49 AM
link   
They are required to open the contract to anyone that can meet their needs, and wants to bid on it, which means Airbus as well as Boeing, and Lockheed (if they're interested). Even a small company could come in and steal the contract if they could meet the requirements. Boeing did a good job of shooting themselves in the foot with the KC767 actually. They'll either go with that again, or as was brought up in another thread, KC777s for long range/airlift, and 737 or something similar for short range. It's POSSIBLE Airbus can get it, but doubtful.



[edit on 1/28/2006 by Zaphod58]



posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 01:52 PM
link   
Sorry about your thread Planeman - never saw it myself. However I do live just down the road from the big cheese, maybe it's a conspiracy...........
Seriously, nothing to do with me!

Back to Airbus though - don't think they have a cats' chance in hell myself, but it would be nice if they did get a fair shot at the contract as they do have a good product. Shame really that politics have to figure, but there you go - way of the world. Still think it's maybe a way of appearing to be fair, screwing Boeing down and in the end keeping everyone happy in the US when Boeing win.

Flew on a 777 early last year - good solid looking plane, plenty of power, left me with a good impression of this Boeing. ( More than I can say for the 767 I flew on late last year - it was a fairly old one though.) Obviously this one would be a good choice for the long range tanker. Haven't been on a long range Airbus, but did fly on a new 321 this summer - sat window, just behind the wing - what a fantastic wing this is! Try it one day if you can - to see the flaps, spoilers etc. in operation was
( No not the first time I've seen a wing working! It really was impressive.) I'll stop waffling now!



posted on Jan, 30 2006 @ 11:26 PM
link   
the us military should only buy us made goods. besides Airbus doesn't has never made a flying boom, which will be needed for a tanker



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Hi bigx01,

Personally, I think that if the product is right and so is the price than there is no reason at all why the US should not buy Airbus. Here's a couple of links re: Airbus tankers -

www.airbus.com...

www.airbus.com...

If Airbus do get a crack at it it could mean jobs for some people in Alabama anyway..............

Don't think this will happen for the reasons I stated in my earlier post



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Crashbus, I mean Airbus DOES have a boom they're testing now. It's a fly by wire system. It's supposed to be the next gen beyond what the USAF uses now.



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 02:12 AM
link   
you're asking an awefull lot. job wont stay in alabama. after the contract is up. jobs leave. money goes back to europe. buy american, money stays american.

probably the same fly by wire thet flew the plane into the ground at the paris airshow a few years back

[edit on 31-1-2006 by bigx01]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:08 AM
link   
Think you'll find it was the pilot who flew that plane into the trees bigX01. Don't think the new infrastructures planned by Airbus would be meant to be only for the duration of the contract either. Just my opinion.



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:16 AM
link   
Actually, before they blamed the pilot they were saying computer error in the throttle controls. Then a few days later it was suddenly "pilot hotdogging"



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Yeah, have to admit it seems a pretty convenient reason for the demise of a new aircraft from a marketing point of view, but looking at the video it also seems a bit yeehaaa don't you think? Other thing I suppose is that I never feel the need to duck when an Airbus goes over anymore than I do when it's a Boeing or a Fokker


Here's an interesting link including the voice cockpit recording transcipt. The site is in Czechoslovakian, but all relevant parts are in English as well -

www.marecek.cz...

And, yeah, I realise that the transcripts could be faked. Can't seem to locate the video at the moment, if I do I will post it.

[edit on 4-2-2006 by maldives01]



posted on Feb, 4 2006 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Having taken a crash course in Czechoslovakian
I can reveal that there is a video link on the very page! It's on the second line - says "tento vidoeklip"

Yeah, i think it does look a bit yeehaaa. Just my opinion.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join