Boeing v Airbus; latest scores

For what it is worth I am with Waynos on this.

I took his "fool" comment to be something broad and general not a personal dig.

I think it is also fair to say that for some time now (particularly on this thread) we have been 'treated' to the kind of annoying trolling and baiting that should, IMO, (were it to be tollerated at all) have been booted out of here and sent straight onto the politics board (where IIRC the tack was tried out before......a spamming issue too, perhaps?).

I thought the rules said obvious and very transparent shallow 'US v Europe' was as unacceptable as the 'a plane v b plane' nonsense?

Don't walk Waynos, your knowledge and wit is appreciated!

[edit on 2-5-2006 by sminkeypinkey]

off topic a bit here. but you all need to get a grip. muslim, jew, etc. it doesn't matter. the last time i looked we all have red blood and breath air. just because you believe in one religion and i another doesn't mean crap. so get over yourselfs


you have the right to your own opinion and i have mine if they conflict then so be it. but who cares. am i going to shrivel and die if you call me a name? frankly if you don't infringe on my feedoms or the freedoms of others then you can say and do what you please, i don't care.

now back to those metal thingies with wings

or maybe they will be composite thingies with wings

[edit on 2-5-2006 by bigx01]

agreed bigx, lets get back on topic. Thanks for the uplifting support I have recieved (no, not from Playtex) both on here and in private

Originally posted by waynos
Hmm, I notice I got a warning for calling that post the ramblings of a warped fool. Am I to take it then that the site staff of ATS considers a post that calls me a 'post christian nihilist who wont have children' fair and reasonable? The mind boggles! And as for all that 'muslim fifth columnist' garbage, that is a sane assessment?

Warped? I'm sure then you can cite a factual error? No hurry...

I don't need to because what was posted what inflammatory trash, without a factual bone in its body. I notice this deeply offensive post goes unchecked while my own angry response to it earned me a warning, hmmm, something faintly fascist about that I think? I thought the T&C's were meant to safeguard against members being offended? Maybe it only protects the rights of some people to be offensive to others without having to face the backlash?

I do not apologise for my response and I maintain that anyone making a post in the manner that el tiante did should EXPECT such a response.


[edit on 2-5-2006 by waynos]

So that's your not-so-laconic way of saying "No, I can't cite a factual error"

It's ok, facts are ever so stubborn things. Consider these:

"Europe becomes more and more a province of Islam, a colony of Islam." So declares Oriana Fallaci in her new book, La Forza della Ragione, or, "The Force of Reason." And the famed Italian journalist is right: Christianity's ancient stronghold of Europe is rapidly giving way to Islam.

Two factors mainly contribute to this world-shaking development.

*The hollowing out of Christianity. Europe is increasingly a post-Christian society, one with a diminishing connection to its tradition and its historic values. The numbers of believing, observant Christians has collapsed in the past two generations to the point that some observers call it the "new dark continent." Already, analysts estimate Britain's mosques host more worshippers each week than does the Church of England.

*An anemic birth rate. Indigenous Europeans are dying out. Sustaining a population requires each woman on average to bear 2.1 children; in the European Union, the overall rate is one-third short, at 1.5 a woman, and falling. One study finds that, should current population trends continue and immigration cease, today's population of 375 million could decline to 275 million by 2075.To keep its working population even, the E.U. needs 1.6 million immigrants a year; to sustain the present workers-to-retirees ratio requires an astonishing 13.5 million immigrants annually.
www.danielpipes.org...

Boeing will be the least of Europe's problems in fifty years (maybe sooner), but don't look for America to save you this time. It's a shame really, as a practicing Catholic I fear for Vatican City.

[edit on 2-5-2006 by El Tiante]

[edit on 3-5-2006 by El Tiante]

[edit on 3-5-2006 by El Tiante]

Completely unrelated to the topic, but more to do with the above post.

I have seen this garbage before about "Europeans dying out" and "Europeans not having babies".

You can cite whatever statistics you like, but for us on the ground here, in Europe, you know, actually seeing for our own eyes, the situation is remarkably different than you would have us believe.

I see babies everywhere. Everyone is having babies. I have 1 of my own already and I'm only 23. People like you also like to cite the fact that "muslims" like to have lots of kids.

That may be true in the third world cess pits they came from as they use the kids as farm hands and servants, plus many die in infancy, but here in Europe the simple cost of living prevents anyone having large familes. 2nd generation muslim immigrants I know only have 1-2 babies, same as the rest of us.

They're not going to "out breed" us as they simply cannot afford it, the same as everyone else.

Also, the population might be aging and living longer, but that is a result of our "socialist cradle-to-grave" systems which actually look after the people, unlike some other Governments which clearly don't give a monkeys unless there is a profit to be made.

As a result, retirement ages are going up, so the workforce will remain the same.

You can try and palm off this doom and gloom rubbish all you like, but for us here on the ground, it's exactly that, rubbish.

By the way, Waynos, You didn't deserve that warning dude and didn't even notice anything malicious in your post until the Mod pointed it out. Even then, the warn was over the top.

Originally posted by stumason
Completely unrelated to the topic, but more to do with the above post.

The only topics for discussion in this forum are related to Aircraft Projects, not ATS members, staff or other off topic issues.

Please select the apprpriate forum for such discussions (might be a great thread starting opportunity) or if the question at hand pertains to a staff member's actions the "Suggestion" button is the route to take.

Now, we can resume the Boeing v Airbus; latest scores discussion or the thread can be closed.

Thanks.

[edit on 2/5/2006 by Mirthful Me]

At the end of the day it comes down to one thing $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Which aircraft is cheaper to maintain and to run.....

Quantas just bought boeing because of $$$$$$$


Is it possible to obtain costings for such a thing (running/maintenance) costs???

[edit on 2-5-2006 by Jezza]

The information is out there, but it's not easy to find. A lot of it is given out, but not really publicized because they don't want competitors getting hold of it and using it.

I don't need to because you stated inflammatory rubbish

No, he didn't. He was right both about America's and Europe's economic performance and about the protests in France and America and about European demographics.

Proof that he was right about America's and Europe's economic performance:
www.cia.gov...
www.cia.gov...

Proof that he was right about European demographics:
www.cia.gov...
www.cia.gov...

About the protests in France and America: the French were protesting against a law that allowed employers to fire young employees without a reason. The American illegal immigrants were protesting against the new immigration law, which would mean that they'd be deportated.

zibi, el tiante. It has already been pointed out by a mod that this has strayed too far off topic. Please take this discussion and "site" it on a forum where the members on it will give a toss. Thank you.

Airbus and Boeing. remember.l

[edit on 3-5-2006 by waynos]

Originally posted by Zibi
Proof that he was right about America's and Europe's economic performance:
www.cia.gov...
www.cia.gov...

Proof that he was right about European demographics:
www.cia.gov...
www.cia.gov...

It is offtopic, but the EU's GDP is larger and the GDP per capita only about 25% lower. It's not like we're third world buggers El Tiante likes to depict us. About economic growth, it is needless to point out the trade deficit and ever increasing debt of the US. When you see two neighbouring families, with one that has a luxury villa and nice sportscar and the other one that has an average house and family car, you might be inclined to think the former is doing better, but asking their accountants about their mortgages and debts might shed a better light and different picture. The US keeps doing well as long as China lends them the money to fund their ever increasing debts. Considering demographics, it's not like overpopulation is that much better either, and overpopulation is what unbridled population growth as in the US will ultimately lead to. I am sorry to remain offtopic but I believe a more objective and nonbashing view is necessary.

[edit on 4-5-2006 by Simon666]

One moderator has already asked people to stay on topic and I will ask one more time. If the off topic discussion continues this thread WILL be closed.

Thanks

Originally posted by Jezza

Is it possible to obtain costings for such a thing (running/maintenance) costs???

[edit on 2-5-2006 by Jezza]

I don't think you can as its going to vary alot by region and a/c type. However I would suspect that within a/c types its going to be close IMHO. A 737NG and an A320 of similar size and engine type should be close IMHO. However if you compare a 4 engine craft to a 2 engine craft, the MRO costs are going to be cheaper because of the greater # of engines.

Also MRO activities are increasingly outsourced in this global economy and places like China and India have growing MRO industries as thier labor costs are really low.

Returning to the post, I think Airbus problem was that it was focused on beating Boeing, that is why the innovation stopped. They used to catch up and pass their US rival, but once that happened they stopped and they made the mistake of underestimating Boeing capacity to recover and its engineer ability.

After A became the No.1 manufacturer, their innovation stopped. Proof of these, where how they continued with traditional fuselages, materials and construction techniques... Hence the A380 which is just a bigger plane but is hardly innovative on any aspect...
or the A350 which is a revamped A330...

having introduced composites and fly by wire I think Airbus has played its part in innovation. I don't think it is fair or right to say that the A380 is not innovative, after all, there is nothing else like it. I think the A350 is just a case of them trying to play catch up (as is the 747-8 with Boeing).

Maybe your view is affected because they are much less innovative than the 787 and obviously so? If that is what you mean then I would have to agree with you, but to say that innovation stopped is quite wrong imho.

Originally posted by carcharodon
After A became the No.1 manufacturer, their innovation stopped. Proof of these, where how they continued with traditional fuselages, materials and construction techniques... Hence the A380 which is just a bigger plane but is hardly innovative on any aspect...

How about the use of GLARE in the A380?

Originally posted by Simon666

Originally posted by carcharodon
After A became the No.1 manufacturer, their innovation stopped. Proof of these, where how they continued with traditional fuselages, materials and construction techniques... Hence the A380 which is just a bigger plane but is hardly innovative on any aspect...

How about the use of GLARE in the A380?

GLARE is a composite material. Its main component is fibreglass. However GLARE turn out to be a flop. After A publicised its used, they suddenly stop using it. It is not used on the A350, and there is rumours that they cut its use on the A380. What was wrong with it, they never said, but GLARE has real issues.
And about using fibreglass composites on Aircraft, Kaman used them in their helicopters in the 1970's...

Check this post about GLARE
www.abovetopsecret.com...

IIRC, Glare had strength issues. It wasn't as strong as they hoped/thought it was going to be.

Originally posted by waynos
do you really think they care if one plane is 2Km/h faster than another?

The 737's typical cruising speed is 848 kph. That means that it flies 8 kph faster than the A319 and that it flies 20 kph faster than the A321.

[edit on 6-5-2006 by Zibi]

...Which means that a 7 hour intercontinental flight will take unbearable 2-5 minutes longer on average, if you calculate in the time to accelerate, ascent, descent and decelerate...

People dont buy ships or trucks based on their top speed either, do they?




[edit on 6/5/2006 by Lonestar24]