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.

 

Boeing v Airbus; latest scores

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I would like to point out that Boeing is likely to win the competition with Airbus for one reason, which is: Airbus has proven that it's unreliable. Airlines from the entire world have ordered A380s, and the delivery of these planes will be delayed. This has proven that Airbus is unreliable.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]




posted on Apr, 28 2006 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Because no Boeing was ever delivered late or ever had any kind of probelm? Dream on mate.

Boeing looks almost certain to regain its former status as the no 1 Airliner producer but your reason as stated above is pure bunk. Do not forget that Airbus, from a standing start as recently as 1972, has not only usurped Boeings place at the top (hence the talk of Boeing 'regaining' that plac) but has also seen off Lockheed and McDonnell Douglas from out of the market altogether, and they were the big two airliner producers long before Boeing emerged to take the crown with its 707 in the 50's. Remember that, in market terms, before the 707 Boeings commercial aircraft were very much in the minority, like your average British airliner always was too. Just look at the production figures for the Stratocruiser if you don't believe me. The 707 made Boeing and the company has done brilliantly ever since but don't you lot 'over there' think its about time some recognition was forthcoming for what Airbus has achieved in less than 40 years, from NOTHING?

Really, all this 'Airbus is crap' Airbus will die away' cobblers is completely pathetic and stupidly one sided for a supposedly intelligent discussion board. Its getting more like Chav central on here lately.




A300 was the first widebody twin, beating the 767 by a full decade!

A320 was the first FBW airliner and first to do away with central yokes and use sidesticks.

Airbus were the first to introduce large scale use of CFRP structures in commercial aircraft.

Airbus Market share;

1975 - 2%

1988 - 16% (as Lockheed is forced out of the civil market)

1996 - 37% ( as McDonnell Douglas market share crumbles and company is taken over by Boeing)

2003 - 50%+ - the first time the biggest share of the airliner market is held by a non-US firm EVER.

Now call me old fashioned but I reckon this is worthy of some praise, rather than the infantile sniping that is dished out all the time.

Does Boeing also deserve such praise? HELL YES! They have been amazing, but you see, us Europeans are mature and intelligent enough to acknowledge as much. How about you Americans?


[edit on 28-4-2006 by waynos]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Boeing looks almost certain to regain its former status as the no 1 Airliner producer

It already has regained that status. In 2005, it has sold 1002 planes, while Airbus has sold 905. Go to in.news.yahoo.com... and you'll find out why Boeing has sold more planes.

Originally posted by waynos
but your reason as stated above is pure bunk. Does Boeing also deserve such praise? HELL YES! They have been amazing, but you see, us Europeans are mature and intelligent enough to acknowledge as much. How about you Americans?


I am not an American, I am a European.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 03:36 AM
link   
Another reason for why Boeing will win the competition with Airbus is that Boeing planes are better.

COMPARISONS

MEDIUM-RANGE AIRLINERS (Boeing 737 vs Airbus A319 family)

Cruising speed: Boeing 737's is 848 kph, while Airbus A319's is 840 kph. So Boeing 737 is faster.

Range: Boeing 737's is 3200 nautical miles, while Airbus A319's is 3700 nautical miles. So Airbus A319 can fly farther.

Number of seats: If we're talking about Boeing 737, it's 189 seats. If we're talking about Airbus A319, it's 125.

In conclusion, Boeing 737 is better than Airbus A319.

LONG-RANGE AIRLINERS (Boeing 777-200LR vs Airbus A340-500)

Cruising speed: Boeing 777-200LR's is Mach 0.84, while Airbus A340-500's is Mach 0.83. So Boeing 777-200LR is faster.

Range: Boeing 777-200LR's is 20300 kilometres, while Airbus A340-500's is 16700 kilometres. So Boeing 777-200LR can fly farther.

Number of seats: If we're talking about Boeing 777-200LR, it's 301 seats. If we're talking about Airbus A340-500, it's 313 seats.

In conclusion, Boeing 777-200LR is better than Airbus A340-500.

REFERENCES:
www.boeing.com...
www.airbus.com...
www.airliners.net...
www.airliners.net...

FINAL STATEMENT

Boeing planes are better than Airbus planes, and this is one of the 2 reasons for why Boeing will win the competition with Airbus (the other one being Airbus's unreliability). France will not achieve its objective of defeating the US.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 03:59 AM
link   
That's an unfair comparison. If you're going to compare the 777 and the A340, then compare the standard versions, not the specially made super long range 777 against the A340. The 777-LR series was redesigned with extra fuel tanks to give it the longer range, but less cargo capacity. If you're going to say it's better than the A340 then sure it is, because it was a later design of the plane that was competing against the Airbus. The ORIGINAL design is the one that should be compared, not when they said "Well this is what we have already, this is what theirs does, so this is how we can make it better."



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
If you're going to compare the 777 and the A340, then compare the standard versions

No, I'm not going to do so. The two companies have designed the improved versions of the 777 and the A340 in order to win the competition.

Admit it: you're just disappointed that even the best version of the A340 is worse than the 777-200LR.

[edit on 2-5-2006 by Zibi]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:07 AM
link   
I'm not dissapointed at all. Ask just about anyone here, I won't fly Airbus if I can possibly avoid it. I don't like them, but it's my PERSONAL CHOICE. I have nothing against Airbus as an organization, I simply agree with Waynos that this "Boeing is better than Airbus" bit is rediculous, and doesn't prove or get us anywhere. People are always going to like one or the other, that doesn't mean that one is automatically better than another, or that one is evil, or whatever other description you want to put in there. Boeing makes good planes, Airbus makes good planes. They are BOTH needed on the market, so that we'll HAVE a market in the future.

And of COURSE it's worse than the -200LR. The -200LR has only made ONE long distance flight so far. Last year.


[edit on 4/29/2006 by Zaphod58]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Listen to me: airlines don't compare standard versions. They just compare the best versions of both aircraft families and choose the better one (which is the Boeing 777-200LR).



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:08 AM
link   


It already has regained that status. In 2005, it has sold 1002 planes, while Airbus has sold 905. Go to in.news.yahoo.com... and you'll find out why Boeing has sold more planes.


No, it hasn't. Look at the very first post in this thread to see why, your own link contains no hard facts, only ifs and buts. It is however imminent as Boeing is in front in the first quarter of 2006, as I said myself. Airbus is still counted as being in front as it has the biggest order backlog overall but Boeing is doing better in new sales at the moment.




I am not an American, I am a European.


Well, er, bully for you. The point you seem to be addressing was a general one, not aimed specifically at you. clearly it might look as if it was but your comments about Airbus are far from being the first on here.

However, given your stance, don't you even ackowledge that the Airbus achievement is quite magnificent on its own merits?




Another reason for why Boeing will win the competition with Airbus is that Boeing planes are better


Some are, some aren't. Obviously. Do you really believe such a simplistic blanket statement or is it meant as a wind up?


[


COMPARISONS

MEDIUM-RANGE AIRLINERS (Boeing 737 vs Airbus A319 family)

Cruising speed: Boeing 737's is 848 kph, while Airbus A319's is 840 kph. So Boeing 737 is faster.


Range: Boeing 737's is 3200 nautical miles, while Airbus A319's is 3700 nautical miles. So Airbus A319 can fly farther.

Number of seats: If we're talking about Boeing 737, it's 189 seats. If we're talking about Airbus A319, it's 125.

In conclusion, Boeing 737 is better than Airbus A319.





Hilarious! "how to compare two utterly different aircraft to prove a point" Classic


The 189 seat 737 is the 737-900, the equivalent to this is the A321 not the A319, there is no 'A319 family', it is the A320 family. Go and figure the rest out for yourself.

I'm not even knocking the 737, its an all time classic, but your argument is bilge.

anyway, moving swiftly to the end,




Boeing planes are better than Airbus planes, and this is one of the 2 reasons for why Boeing will win the competition with Airbus (the other one being Airbus's unreliability). France will not achieve its objective of defeating the US.


What unreliability is this? You haven't shown any, unless you think that bland comments make up a convincing case?

Oh, and also, for a European, you are remarkably ignotant to the fact that Airbus is not French, it is pan European and is every bit as much British, as it is German as it is Spanish etc etc.



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
No, it hasn't. Look at the very first post in this thread to see why, your own link contains no hard facts, only ifs and buts.

Boeing HAS regained its status. Had you read the site the link to which I posted, you'd find out that the Chinese have said "We still don't know how many planes we will order". Until they say that they are ordering 150 planes, that order cannot be counted. Therefore, in 2005 Airbus has sold only 905 planes, not 1055. 905 is less than 1002 (which is the number of aircraft Boeing has sold in 2005).


Originally posted by waynos
Hilarious! "how to compare two utterly different aircraft to prove a point"

They are not "utterly different". They are both intended for the same market - the medium-range plane market.


Originally posted by waynos
The 189 seat 737 is the 737-900, the equivalent to this is the A321

Which is worse than the 737-900 - its number of seats is 185.


Originally posted by waynos
What unreliability is this? You haven't shown any

The delivery of the 159 A380 planes that have been so far ordered will be delayed. That proves that Airbus is unreliable.


Originally posted by waynos
Oh, and also, for a European, you are remarkably ignotant to the fact that Airbus is not French

I know that it's European, but it has been set up by the French in order to defeat Boeing.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zibi
Listen to me: airlines don't compare standard versions. They just compare the best versions of both aircraft families and choose the better one (which is the Boeing 777-200LR).


They look at what the companies SAY is going to be the performance figures, then the prototype is rolled out, and they test fly it, and then they look at the ACTUAL performance figures, and THEN they make their decision. No airline is going to look at the proven performance of the 777-200 or the A340, and say "Well in 4 years they're going to come out with something to top this, so we'll just wait." The airlines don't look for the best plane, they look for the best plane for THEM. You're leaving out one HUGE factor in this though.

Cost Per Seat Hour is the BIGGEST decision on what plane the airlines buy. You can't just look at the performance, or how many seats they hold and make your decision based on that. You have to look at what the hourly costs are going to be. If that 777-200LR that you say is so great is $5 more per hour than the A340-500 per seat, guess which one they're going to buy? Go ahead, take a wild guess.

There are so many HUGE factors in the decision to buy an airplane for an airline that you're leaving out. If you just look at the basic numbers then SURE Boeing planes lately ARE better than Airbus planes. But let's look at ALL the numbers and then say one is better than the other.



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Waynos, you'd save yourself time if you'd just say "I'm right because I am".



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Cost Per Seat Hour is the BIGGEST decision on what plane the airlines buy.

Boeing 777-200LR's operating cost per seat are 16% lower than that of the A340-500. Proof: 777.newairplane.com...



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zibi
The delivery of the 159 A380 planes that have been so far ordered will be delayed. That proves that Airbus is unreliable.


Not to put too fine a point on it, but Boeing has had delays in it's development of planes as well. Just because they delay something doesn't mean they're unreliable. So Airbus is responsible for the strike at the plant that makes the 1/2 inch widget that delays the first flight a month? Or the fact that the engines weigh 25 pounds more than they were told, so they have to recheck their figures, which takes 2 months? Or any number of other problems that are out of their hands?


Oh and as for your "significantly better 777-200LR" guess what? Boeing delayed it 18 months. Between delays in getting parts, and the soft market, they pushed it from 2004, to late 2005.

Here's another one for Boeing. Ryanair had to change their flight schedule around because Boeing was a month late delivering planes. A month to an airline is a HUGE deal. That's a lot of money they're losing in that time. They wound up cutting 1% of their schedule, and delaying two routes from adding a second plane. That hurts the airlines.

So it's not like Boeing is perfect when it comes to deliveries either.



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:30 AM
link   
Zibi, Airbus is currently No 1 because it has the largest outstanding order book, this seems set to change because Boeing is currently selling more planes, I can't make it any more simple than that, if youare too dim to follow it I give up.

Your criteria for which is the 'better' aircraft are schoolboy plane spotter criteria, not what the ailines look at, do you really think they give a toss if one plane is 2Km/h faster than another?

The number of seats installed in an airliner is decided by the airline, if they want to put 200 seats in an A321 they can, if they want one with 175 they can have that as well. It is the profitability and operating costs they judge them on, not wing span and max speed etc.

Some airlines will find the 737-900 best for them, some will find the A321 best. Do you actually know anything about aviation or are you quoting figures from the 'Big Book of Airliners'? You couldn't even choose a comparison of like types correctly as you were quoting the A319


The A380 has suffered developmental delays, hey, guess what, so has the 787. Does that make Boeing unreliable too?




Waynos, you'd save yourself time if you'd just say "I'm right because I am".


But I'm not saying Airbus planes are better than Boeing, I'm saying that you are talking cobblers.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by waynos]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zaphod58
So it's not like Boeing is perfect when it comes to deliveries either.

That means that both companies are unreliable. Considering that Boeing planes are better than Airbus planes, it is sure that Boeing will win the competition with Airbus.



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:35 AM
link   
The penny that this was a troll dropped some time ago, and yet I carried on. Alas now I have something better to do, if this argument is till flowing whern I get home from watching the Millers I will rejoin it



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by waynos
Zibi, Airbus is currently No 1

No, it's not. In 2005, Boeing has received orders for 1002 planes, while Airbus has received orders for 905 planes. Proof: in.news.yahoo.com...


Originally posted by waynos
But I'm not saying Airbus planes are better than Boeing, I'm saying that you are saying rubbish.

You are saying that you're right just because you are. That's what you have been doing since I joined the discussion about the "Boeing vs Airbus" issue.


Originally posted by waynos
Your criteria for which is the 'better' aircraft are schoolboy plane spotter criteria, not what the ailines look at, do you really think they give a toss if one plane is 2Km/h faster than another?

Whatever criteria you would use, Boeing planes are better than Airbus planes.

[edit on 29-4-2006 by Zibi]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 05:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lonestar24
In the case of a rapid downfall of the aircraft industry a real advantage for Airbus is that Germany and France (along Japan) are the definitive leaders in train and maglev technology.

Japan is not. The fastest train in the world is the German ICE train, with the French TGV train being the second-fastest. The fastest Japanese train is capable of the speed of up to only 210 kph.

[edit on 3-5-2006 by Zibi]



posted on Apr, 29 2006 @ 05:33 AM
link   
Japan has built maglev trains capable of 500km/hr. Just because they don't currently have them in service doesn't mean that they aren't leading the way in research. They've been experimenting with maglev since the 1960s.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join