Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Give Airbus 380 a wink! [JPEG orgy]

Give Airbus 380 a wink! [JPEG orgy] (Page 33)
Thread Tools
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 07:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
badidea I think your connection to the company has made you a bit too over emotional for this thread.
Kevin I think your ignorance towards the subject has made you look like a fool in every single post in this thread.

You stick to your opinion, I'll stick to mine. Life goes on and no one cares.

V
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
badidea
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 08:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
badidea I think your connection to the company has made you a bit too over emotional for this thread.
You're probably right but my emotions are not as much related to the subject as it seems - I just cannot stand stupid people with small egos no matter what the subject is about!
Or can you explain to me why some people here who have no connection to the company (the thread is not about Airbus btw - just the A380!!) get so emotional?
***
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 09:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo View Post
Kevin I think your ignorance towards the subject has made you look like a fool in every single post in this thread.

You stick to your opinion, I'll stick to mine. Life goes on and no one cares.
voodoo why do you keep posting hateful and baseless posts like this? I've never claimed to be an expert in the subject of planes, let alone this one. I've just stated it looks to be an economic failure. And now after all this, there is no question of that. I don't know diddly about planes. But I do have the common sense to look at the numbers, do my own little bar graphs in my head (I had office installed) and see it's not going to make them a lot of money. That is all I have said.

My last comment was out of concern. He the poster I was referring to seems to respond in a hostile nature because of his ties with the company.

I am not saying that is an unnatural response, or that I don't respect him having pride in his job/work. I just stated that I think his close ties to the company maybe makes him make posts such as he did because of self defense mechanisms.

He at least has a valid, and somewhat respectable excuse for acting the way he is. But you don't.
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 09:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by badidea View Post
You're probably right but my emotions are not as much related to the subject as it seems - I just cannot stand stupid people with small egos no matter what the subject is about!
I think hatefulness tops my list of bad things. It's a bit higher that "stupid", which in this case is highly subjective. I can understand too how PacHead can piss people off. While I personally have nothing against the guy, I don't think he should react the way he does sometimes. But that is his choice.
Or can you explain to me why some people here who have no connection to the company (the thread is not about Airbus btw - just the A380!!) get so emotional?
No I cannot. I do not understand why anyone with no connection to the plane or the company get so emotional over it. Either Pro or Against. It's just a piece of machinery. But as I stated before. I understand YOUR reactions in this thread. I am not attempting to say you are a bad person by the way you are reacting. I think it's only natural to defend such a thing in your position. And I can respect that type of behavior. I apologize if my post came off as high horsed or condescending. Maybe it should have been a msg to you instead personally.

my bad.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 09:31 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I've never claimed to be an expert in the subject of planes, let alone this one. -- I don't know diddly about planes.-- That is all I have said.
No argument there.

V
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
badidea
Professional Poster
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Hamburg
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 09:43 AM
 
Ok, cool!

I am just pissed sometimes that this thread already became political and a huge fight between Americans and Non-Americans on the first few pages just because (yes, this was my personal impression) the largest passenger airplane wasn't build by Americans anymore!
I might be wrong with this impression but for me this was a quite obvious observation!
Why else should Americans care so much that a European company is building this airplane?

I don't really care what plane I am flying with. Boeing and Airbus both have around 50% market share. Both build equal quality. Both make mistakes. Both have problems with new technologies...
...but only Americans have a saying like "If it's not Boeing, I am not going!"

Sorry, I find that very nationalistic and stupid.

I'll try to keep myself out of those fights here in the future just like I try to keep myself out of the Pol-Lounge...
***
     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 10:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo View Post
No argument there.
Well then why the tirade? I wasn't discussing the plane itself.
Originally Posted by badidea View Post
Ok, cool!

I am just pissed sometimes that this thread already became political and a huge fight between Americans and Non-Americans on the first few pages just because (yes, this was my personal impression) the largest passenger airplane wasn't build by Americans anymore!
Hmm I didn't get that impression or see that, but If you claimed it happened, I am sure it did. But I did see a lot of non-americans being critical of anyone
saying anything bad about the plane acting as if they were talking about their mothers. So both sides of the extreme are wrong here IMHO. I have no interest in planes, or the size of them. It means nothing to me.
I might be wrong with this impression but for me this was a quite obvious observation!
Why else should Americans care so much that a European company is building this airplane?
I don't think that they cared so much as that they saw certain people reacting a certain way when they would mention flaws. This shows up as a shiny red button to some people. And they have to touch it, and keep touching it. We all have been tempted by the shiny red button from time to time. Myself included. Having said that, I believe there are a few Boeing made fans in here that are playing the VS. side as well.
I don't really care what plane I am flying with. Boeing and Airbus both have around 50% market share. Both build equal quality. Both make mistakes. Both have problems with new technologies...
...but only Americans have a saying like "If it's not Boeing, I am not going!"
I am not so sure about that last comment. I've heard xenophobic comments like that made from both sides of the pond.
Sorry, I find that very nationalistic and stupid.
I agree it is.
I'll try to keep myself out of those fights here in the future just like I try to keep myself out of the Pol-Lounge...
Yeah I keep myself out of there too. It's a cesspool. No real political discussion goes on there. Just a lot of mud slinging.

There should really be no more trolling in here. If someone posts something good about the plane it should be accredited. If someone mentions something that is a loss, they should do it in a non-flamey way, and those that are fans of the plane shouldn't make attacks towards them if their intentions weren't of the flame sort. I myself have been guilt of it in this thread too when I should have known better.

I think the extremes of both sides need to stop and realize what they are getting so heated up over. Something so meaningless in the grand scheme of things.
     
PacHead
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Capital of the World
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 02:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by badidea View Post
(please go ahead and get your account deleted and leave already, will ya?)
It's really none of your business, but don't whine to me, I don't like whiners. Go whine to the mods and admins if you have a problem with the speed at which they handle things.

     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 02:34 PM
 
     
PacHead
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Capital of the World
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 02:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
You ARE a whiner.
It's all a matter of perception, and you happen to be incorrect in this instance, since my lowkey method which I first attempted didn't produce satisfactory results, so I had to resort to plan B.

     
Kevin
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 06:01 PM
 
Originally Posted by analogika View Post
I guess in that way, everyone on this forum is a whiner.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 06:39 PM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
I guess in that way, everyone on this forum is a whiner.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 08:48 PM
 
Originally Posted by PacHead View Post
It seems as if far more Europeans work for Airbus than Americans.

Go check it out yourself on wikipedia:

Which has nothing to do with the value share of the A380. Americans working for other companies add substantial value to the WhaleJet.
     
imitchellg5
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Washington + Colorado
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 30, 2007, 09:42 PM
 
Stop bickering please, this is a good thread, keep it going.
     
glideslope
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 1, 2007, 07:17 AM
 
Originally Posted by Kevin View Post
badidea I think your connection to the company has made you a bit too over emotional for this thread.
Come on. He never worked on the wing. Take it easy on him. The wiring, well, thats another story.......
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.”
Sun Tzu
     
mrtew
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 1, 2007, 03:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by imitchellg5 View Post
Stop bickering please, this is a good thread, keep it going.
Originally Posted by glideslope View Post
Come on. He never worked on the wing. Take it easy on him. The wiring, well, thats another story.......
OK then... START bickering!

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
Weyland-Yutani
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: LV-426
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Dec 22, 2007, 12:53 AM
 
The 380 gets a mention in JibJab "in 2007" video.

"...big ass plane..."

“Building Better Worlds”
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 12:46 PM
 
New problems with the A380: the escape slides have to be overhauled every couple flights because the propellant decomposes and the slides become non-functional. The slides are made by the American company BF Goodrich.

Riesenjet A380: Airbus hat Probleme mit den Notrutschen - Wirtschaft - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 12:49 PM
 
SOCIALISSS!



(right?)
     
mrtew
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 02:59 PM
 
Any super cool new pictures of the plane?

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 04:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
New problems with the A380: the escape slides have to be overhauled every couple flights because the propellant decomposes and the slides become non-functional. The slides are made by the American company BF Goodrich.

Riesenjet A380: Airbus hat Probleme mit den Notrutschen - Wirtschaft - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten
I don't read German, but it sounds unlikely; Goodrich has been doing aircraft slides for years. Point me to an AD or the EASA/JAA equivalent and I'll believe you.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 04:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by mrtew View Post
Any super cool new pictures of the plane?





( Last edited by Buckaroo; Feb 10, 2008 at 01:21 PM. )
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 04:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I don't read German, but it sounds unlikely; Goodrich has been doing aircraft slides for years. Point me to an AD or the EASA/JAA equivalent and I'll believe you.
All slides to date have been inflated by compressed air.

These are driven by chemical charges, like an airbag.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 05:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
I don't read German, but it sounds unlikely; Goodrich has been doing aircraft slides for years. Point me to an AD or the EASA/JAA equivalent and I'll believe you.
Translated version of http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/0,1518,534209,00.html
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 9, 2008, 08:15 PM
 
Show me the money, er, AD.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 05:07 AM
 
Here's an English-language article, based on an article from the German "stern" magazine website:

Airbus A380 has hitch with escape slides: report - Yahoo! News UK

The stern.de article:
Airbus A 380: Probleme bei Notrutschen - Computer-technik - stern.de

They quote an Airbus speaker named Barbara Kracht, who, a quick Google reveals, is in fact VP Media Relations at Airbus and has been a spokesperson for at least five years.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 11:47 AM
 
They don't actually quote her, they just say she said there was a problem which may not be exactly the problem described.

The English translation also makes it sound like a one time fix rather than an ongoing maintaince requirement as TETENAL implied in his post.

I've been in aviation long enough to be skeptical of the media getting stories right.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 01:06 PM
 
A380 company replied with the following:

EADS unit Airbus denied a report in the German magazine Stern that said its super-jumbo A380 aircraft has problems with how frequently it must replace the cartridges that deploy its emergency evacuation slides.

It said the cartridges are currently replaced after every 70 flights, as planned when the new plane went into service last October, and that work is underway to make the cartridges last longer.

EADS unit Airbus denies report of problem with A380 evacuation slides - Forbes.com

Which is a little bit more accurate than the first story, but also some BS. It should not have to be swapped out every 70 flights. That could be less than a month.
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 01:25 PM
 
They confirm they have to be swapped out every 70 flights. All they deny is that this is not "as planned".
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 03:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
They don't actually quote her
The stern article DOES actually quote her, as saying "the charges currently (="momentan") need to be replaced about every 70 flights." and again later on, as saying "the problem is under control."
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 03:49 PM
 
Thanks for the translation from stern, however with Airbus denying it that makes me think there's no AD to back it up.

Originally Posted by Buckaroo View Post
Which is a little bit more accurate than the first story, but also some BS. It should not have to be swapped out every 70 flights. That could be less than a month.
It may be a time based limitation rather than a cycle based limitation, but they've converted it to flights to help the public understand.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 04:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
It may be a time based limitation rather than a cycle based limitation, but they've converted it to flights to help the public understand.
I thought they went with the number of flights vs. number of days (something the public could more easily measure) for the bigger number. If they post every 3 weeks instead of an larger ambiguous number (70) that means nothing to the stock holders and public.

They are trying to hide the problem in a bigger number. Every 3 weeks means damn, you got problems.

70 flights could mean anything, 3 months, 6 months, who knows.
     
mrtew
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 07:52 PM
 

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 09:34 PM
 
Is this good or bad for global warming?
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 10, 2008, 09:41 PM
 
Considering that its output is basically steam and nitrous oxides, it would be seriously less of a problem than anything using conventional fuels. I wonder how a liquid hydrogen-fueled engine can produce nitrous oxides (other than a few incidental molecules formed during the hydrogen combustion process), but that's beside the point. From a greenhouse standpoint it would be worlds better than a fossil fueled jet, and since it would take a lot more passengers a lot farther, it could make a serious dent in the airline industry's carbon footprint.

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 05:36 AM
 
All this aside, I'm beginning to think that Airbus has bet on the wrong horse with the A380. From what I can tell, the biggest growth in air traffic in the next 30 years is going to be short to medium haul in and around India and China, with connections to the rest of south Asia and Europe. In the area in and around China and India you have 3 billion people, with about 2 billion of them stepping into increasingly modern and wealthy economic conditions in the next three decades. It's the same kind of economies of scale which drove the American aviation industry in the post World War II years, only two orders of magnitude greater. Given the large populations and relatively short distances (Mumbai to Shanghai is only ~3,000 miles) I don't see much need for something as large and expensive as the A380. I do see a big market for things like the uprated 737s, the 787 and the 737 successor and the A320 and A330. I just don't think there's going to be a huge increase in the kind of transcontinental travel the A380 is built for.

It's also interesting to look at the history. Even though the 747 was Boeing's iconic aircraft, it was never a huge seller. It only sold about 1,400 in 40 years. In the same time frame the 737 has sold over 7,000. The 757 sold 1,050 in only 21 years, and the 767 has sold over 1,000 in 26 years. The 787 already has 885 orders, and it's range and seating are smack in the sweet spot of the medium haul market. I think Airbus got a bit greedy and decided they were going to knock Boeing's biggest plane out of the market. The problem is that the transcontinental market is a relatively small part of the global air travel market and, because of the distances and fuel involved, a market which gives a relatively poor ROI when compared to the short and medium haul market. Given the enormous time and expense Airbus has put into the A380, I think they'd be much better off putting more effort into getting the A350 sorted out.

You just don't need an A380, or a 747, to fly from Mumbai to Calcutta, or from Beijing to Hong Kong.
( Last edited by Don Pickett; Feb 11, 2008 at 05:44 AM. )
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Andy8
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Hong Kong
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 06:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
You just don't need an A380, or a 747, to fly from Mumbai to Calcutta, or from Beijing to Hong Kong.
But with landing slots at Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, Tokyo and Osaka already starting to squeeze, having bigger capacity planes full of passengers and or freight makes sense.

I see plenty of 747's with 100% economy class for domestic use within Japan and Mainland China, where a 100% economy class A380 fitting these domestic markets very nicely.
     
voodoo
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Salamanca, España
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 06:45 AM
 
There is the A350XWB to compete in that market - against the B787 - while the 380 is for another niche. Airbus bet a lot on the 380, but it didn't bet everything.

This isn't so dramatic.
I could take Sean Connery in a fight... I could definitely take him.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 07:37 AM
 
You can't really compare the sheer sales figures of two types of aircraft. Even if the market is smaller (in terms of numbers of planes), it doesn't mean it's not lucrative to go after. Both, Boeing and Airbus have independently found that they won't be able to start designing the successors to their 737/A320 lines before 2015 (apparently they need improved engines).
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 02:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by Andy8 View Post
But with landing slots at Hong Kong, Beijing, Shanghai, Tokyo and Osaka already starting to squeeze, having bigger capacity planes full of passengers and or freight makes sense.

I see plenty of 747's with 100% economy class for domestic use within Japan and Mainland China, where a 100% economy class A380 fitting these domestic markets very nicely.
True. But you're still talking about a very small slice of the market. There are many, many more 737s and A320s out there, and they're both selling very well. I think the future lies in with the 787/A350.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 02:25 PM
 
Originally Posted by voodoo View Post
There is the A350XWB to compete in that market - against the B787 - while the 380 is for another niche. Airbus bet a lot on the 380, but it didn't bet everything.

This isn't so dramatic.
It is dramatic considering the problems Airbus is having with the A350, and questions are being raised as to whether Airbus has the excess engineering capability to develop another aircraft so soon after the A380, especially considering the fact Airbus essentially had to redesign to A350 when industry heads said they wouldn't buy the original presentation.

I'm not saying that AIrbus is doomed or anything silly, only that I think they took a shot at a market which will give them much poorer ROI than others they could have chosen.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 02:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
You can't really compare the sheer sales figures of two types of aircraft. Even if the market is smaller (in terms of numbers of planes), it doesn't mean it's not lucrative to go after. Both, Boeing and Airbus have independently found that they won't be able to start designing the successors to their 737/A320 lines before 2015 (apparently they need improved engines).
Those are two separate lines of thought, and Boeing is still selling as many 737s as they can make.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
analogika
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: 888500128
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 11, 2008, 09:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by mduell View Post
Thanks for the translation from stern, however with Airbus denying it that makes me think there's no AD to back it up.
The Airbus spokeswoman has CONFIRMED the problem.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 12, 2008, 03:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
Those are two separate lines of thought, and Boeing is still selling as many 737s as they can make.
No, they're not.
Airbus' smaller planes are also selling like sliced bread -- no wonder both companies got to the same conclusion.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
Buckaroo
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2008, 04:17 AM
 
     
Don Pickett
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: New York, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2008, 03:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
No, they're not.
Airbus' smaller planes are also selling like sliced bread -- no wonder both companies got to the same conclusion.
That's my point: I think the massive amount of money put into the A380 was a bad investment. Better it would've been spent to get the A350 off the ground.
The era of anthropomorphizing hardware is over.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2008, 04:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by Don Pickett View Post
That's my point: I think the massive amount of money put into the A380 was a bad investment. Better it would've been spent to get the A350 off the ground.
I don't think so. I think it's good if companies invest money in different markets so now Boeing is getting better and has an edge in one market while Airbus has an edge in another. (I'm glad that Boeing has made it, if the 787 hadn't been successful, Boeing would have been in very deep trouble.) I've recently read that Asian airlines have been asking airbus to make even bigger versions of the A380! :wow:

In both cases, their newly developed technologies trickle down into their other lines (e. g. 748 or A350).
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2008, 05:01 PM
 
     
mrtew
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2008, 05:54 PM
 

WOW, that's cool!

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
     
glideslope
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Feb 24, 2008, 06:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
No, they're not.
Airbus' smaller planes are also selling like sliced bread -- no wonder both companies got to the same conclusion.
At the end of 2007 Airbus had a backlog of 3,421 frames. Boeing 3,427 frames.
To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.”
Sun Tzu
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:23 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,