Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Pulls Ahead: How'd They Do That?  
User currently offlinePlanemaker From Tuvalu, joined Aug 2003, 6459 posts, RR: 34
Posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3768 times:

I just received my November copy of the Smithsonian Air & Space Magazine and was surprised by the cover - a rear shot of Airbus' A330 on climb out with the following title:

AIRBUS PULLS AHEAD
How'd they do that?

The 10 page story inside (with pics) is titled "The Contender, How Airbus got to be number one." An interesting account of the history of Airbus from its varied roots.

Nice to see that, like most Airline.net members, the Smithsonian Air&Space Magazine supports all of aviation without a "them" vs "us" mentality.

Unfortunately, at times there have been some pretty bitter and outrageous statements and comments in the A vs B dialogue - but some have also been pretty funny. One, which is in the magazine article, is Airbus' test pilot commenting on the 777 FBW system: "Like putting a steering wheel on a horse."


Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. - A. Einstein
43 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCanadianNorth From Canada, joined Aug 2002, 3395 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3741 times:

How'd Airbus pull ahead? I would imagine my selling more aircraft...

CanadianNorth



What could possibly go wrong?
User currently offlineAerobalance From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 4686 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3702 times:

BY...

Being Supported by outrageous Government Subsidies for both their civil and government programs, thus offering their product at considerably lower prices than the competition.

Add to this their attractive (scrupulous) financing arrangements and thus airlines will take their product.

I can say more but everybody knows their business practices already, ho-hum.




"Sing a song, play guitar, make it snappy..."
User currently offlineAirxliban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4518 posts, RR: 53
Reply 3, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3643 times:

discarding any of the personal feelings I might have for Boeing or for Airbus and not taking into account business strategies or the like, Airbus has superior product offerings than they did in the past.

They now have a product to compete with every single Boeing commercial jetliner...and then some.

737 family? A318/19/20/21
747 family? The A340-600 already in service and upcoming A380.
757/767 family? Some overlap, but the A321 is available and so is the A330 and A340.
777? Several variants of A340s exist, a case can even be made for the A330-300.

In addition, where is the 777-200LR boeing? Not that the A340-500 salesbook is running out of pages, but still.

Just my two cents. They both offer fantastic airliners, but Airbus is definitely in a much better competitive position than they were in a long time ago. Boeing hasn't come up with anything breathtaking recently. They canceled the sonic cruiser and the 7E7 project is still in its infancy.



PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
User currently offlineMITaero From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 497 posts, RR: 8
Reply 4, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3617 times:

>the 7E7 project is still in its infancy.

I would not say this, a great deal of design work is done.


User currently offlineAirxliban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4518 posts, RR: 53
Reply 5, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3610 times:

i suppose this is true, but what i meant is that the 7E7 will not be coming to a sky near you anytime soon, unlike the Airbus offerings which are set to go (except the A380, which isnt ready just yet).


PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
User currently offlineGEG2RAP From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 853 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3601 times:

How did airbus do it cause everyone in washington talks about subsidizing Boeing but no one does anything about it. Airbus is practically giving the planes away because the countries sponsoring Airbus feed them full of government money ( I am not saying this is bad it creates tons of jobs) but it allows Airbus to sell them cheap cheap cheap (airbus is a good brand) but as an American I tend to think Boeing should be the only thing America's airlines fly (no scientific basis for that just economics, if Americans have jobs they have money to fly on America's airlines, if Europenans have jobs, well it's affect on America's airlines are marginal)
GEG2RAP (on 757's  Smile


User currently offlineAirxliban From Lebanon, joined Oct 2003, 4518 posts, RR: 53
Reply 7, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3578 times:

on the other hand, why can't they just choose whichever product suits their needs?

What if NWA really needed A330s for their fleet but had to buy 767 or 777s for the route instead?

Same with US Airways, United and the like. Although I really can't understand why AA has those A300-605R's. Do they really provide something over 767-200s or 757s or what have you?



PARIS, FRANCE...THE BEIRUT OF EUROPE.
User currently offline'Longreach' From Australia, joined Jul 2001, 505 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3565 times:

I was watching a Boeing video once, and there was a huge banner in the factory saying something along the lines of 'avoid foreign parts'.

This could be a reason why their product is so expensive(?)

And give some credit to Airbus, they may have got this 'money' as you all say, but its what they have done with this cash which makes them number one!

They have built a quality line up, several plane designs yet only two different cockpit families. Someone had the lights switched on.


User currently offlineGEG2RAP From United States of America, joined Sep 2003, 853 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3473 times:

Alll I was saying was a lot lot more Boeing employees (and people who make their living indirectly from Boeing employees) fly say NWA US Airways United than Airbus employees kinda nice to keep cash in your customers/market base pockets, and let's face it for every product Airbus and Boeing have the other has a direct competitor for or something so close it is hard to tell ie 737-319/320 757-321 767-330 777-340 747-380 I know there is a 100 pax difference there but don't be expecting to be seeing many of those parked at American airports as soon as they come out. Lot of proving for that plane to do first before it is in the same credibility as the 747.
GEG2RAP


User currently offlineB2707SST From United States of America, joined Apr 2003, 1371 posts, RR: 59
Reply 10, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3455 times:

That banner was probably "Avoid Foreign Object Debris," a reminder that stray loose objects in and around aircraft are not good, and not a political statement about component sourcing. This is the reason no purses or cameras are allowed on the Everett factory tour.

On the whole, Airbus has newer facilities and a younger aircraft fleet. The 737NG and A320 are fighting to a draw, while Boeing once dominated that market segment, and the A330-200 has recently eclipsed the 767 family. The A380 has sold better than I expected, mostly due to an obsessive/compulsive mideast carrier, blunting the 777's defeat of the early A340s. Neither the 777LR airplanes or the A340NGs are selling too well at present. Several of Boeing's aircraft are hitting turbulence: 757 production is almost certainly coming to an end, the 717 is dependent on a major order to survive, and 747 sales are slow due to recession and uncertainty about the family's future.

For whatever reason - newer infrastructure, lower labor costs, subsidies, accounting differences, etc. - Airbus has also been able to discount its products more heavily. Airbus is chasing market share, which its executives have openly admitted, and Boeing is not. Boeing stopped targeting market share several years ago, at which point the Commercial division's bottom line began a marked climb. This strategy is not without its dangers, though, as Airbus rapidly gains a larger customer base. In addition, geopolitical factors have not been working in Boeing's favor lately.

Airbus and Boeing will probably continue a 50/50 market share split for the foreseeable future, with fluctuations from year to year. The US economy seems poised for faster growth than the Eurozone, which will give Boeing a boost over Airbus. Boeing may well have the advantage in 10-20 years, when the A330 and A340 will need simultaneous replacement, as well as the A320 if nothing is done earlier.

--B2707SST



Keynes is dead and we are living in his long run.
User currently offlineDionysus From Thailand, joined Aug 2003, 67 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3404 times:

Aerobalance

You sounded like those Big Three executives during the 80s. Never accept the fact that foreign competitors are ahead.

What about these facts that made Airbus ahead?
More efficient manufacturing system = lower cost.
Commonality along the product line.


User currently offlineOsteogenesis From Germany, joined May 2003, 647 posts, RR: 2
Reply 12, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 3384 times:

B2707SST

The US economy seems poised for faster growth than the Eurozone, which will give Boeing a boost over Airbus.

I agree with almost everything you wrote. It is also true that the US economy may grow faster the the European economy. But most studies predict that the US airline industry wont be growing significantly over the next 30 years. The biggest growth will be in the middle and far east. And those are markets where Airbus is very well positioned.




User currently offlineFLYSSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7428 posts, RR: 57
Reply 13, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3297 times:

Come on Guys...! Boeing is getting as much money from the US government, and maybe more, (officially for its "military program"...  Innocent ) as Airbus is getting from European Gov.
so please, STOP with this quite old and outdated argument.


User currently offlineOsteogenesis From Germany, joined May 2003, 647 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3283 times:

FLYSSC,

Come on Guys...! Boeing is getting as much money from the US government, and maybe more, (officially for its "military program"... ) as Airbus is getting from European Gov.
so please, STOP with this quite old and outdated argument.


I doubt they stop using this argument its the only one they have.  Smile/happy/getting dizzy



User currently offlineFLYSSC From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 7428 posts, RR: 57
Reply 15, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 3274 times:

Now, to answer the topic question : Just, maybe, because Airbus makes good aircrafts that me the needs of Airlines in today's world.... Is it too simple to understand ?


GEG2RAP, the world is not only US and Europe.
Strange, but classical American vision of world trade : US must buy US products, and the rest of the world... must also buy American !!!

US airlines must buy US aircrafts. SO it seems logical to me that European Airlines should only buy European planes...Too bad for Boeing... they would have sold just a few of their B744 to NW and UA in that case....

And what about Asia ? Africa ? South America ? should they also have their own aviation industry or simple ride...trains ?


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3135 times:

I don't know the September deliveries for Boeing, but as of August 31st, Boeing has delivered 184 aircraft and Airbus has delivered 181, so Boeing is still ahead, but by, as we say, only a c&nt's hair.

As far as orders go, Airbus has beaten Boeing this year, without question.

Charles


User currently offlineCedarjet From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 8202 posts, RR: 54
Reply 17, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3118 times:

This 'subsidy' thing is absolute bollocks for three important reasons that no-one on these boards ever seems able to grasp.

For one thing, Europe was never far behind Boeing and the Americans, especially on the high-tech front. Just look at Britain alone: the first jetliner (Comet 1), first trans-Atlantic jetliner (Comet 4), the nicest longhaul liner ever (VC10), the highly successful BAC111 (a major hit in the US btw), and of course the only successful supersonic jetliner (Concorde)...which brings us to the French: first short-haul jetliner (Caravelle), first supersonic jetliner (Concorde), and didn't they also invent the whole concept of manned flight with balloons? So it didn't take a huge leap to regain their position.*

I would argue that without MASSIVE gov't subsidy, Boeing would never have taken the commercial lead that it enjoyed from the late 50s to the 90s - do you really think the 707 would have been possible without the Bs 47 and 52? So to pretend Airbus are the only beneficiaries of massive gov't largesse in the aerospace business is absolute nonsense; and it goes on to this day, ie the 767 tanker deal, all the military programs, space programs...as though the billions and billions of dollars of R&D feedback from these programs doesn't benefit the commercial product line in any way? Insane! Also insane is the idea that the British / German / French gov'ts can afford to lose billions of dollars just to rob the hated Yanks of their precious commercial aeroplane industry. If they wanted to put one over on the Americans there are easier and cheaper ways of doing it. Airbus exists to make money and make money it most certainly does.

And finally, here's how it makes money: it's products are up-to-date and do what they're needed to. All this 'boo-hoo, I can't believe Boeing are closing the 757 line' shit really gets on my nerves! It's a 20 year old design that is way too much plane for the job. The A321 weighs a lot less (compare the main gears just for starters) and is much more advanced in every way (which, given it's youth, is inevitable). Airbus customers are in this business to make money and if the planes aren't right for the job it simply doesn't matter how cheap the planes are. Come on, does anyone believe Airbus planes are dogs? If you were starting an airline, would you buy 20 A320s for $100m each or 20 Tupolevs for $250,000 each?

(*: Speaking of Tupolevs, I have left the Russians out of my 'first this' and 'first that' honours list, I don't know if the Caravelle beat the Tu104 into service, I'm just comparing Airbus' ancestors to Boeing. And the Caravelle beat the 737 and DC9 by quite a few years.)



fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
User currently offlineDelta-flyer From United States of America, joined Jul 2001, 2676 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 3065 times:

Planemaker ..... great thread, but ....

How about sharing with us what the Smithsonian said? We already know the A.net members' opnions, we see them every day. Can we see something new for a change?

As far as US subsidies are concerned, there is an important element that escapes most of its critics ... when the US government funds a program at Boeing (or Lockheed, or anyone) the bulk of the effort is done by the lower tier aerospace supply base. The prime only does the integration, where there is not a great deal (relatively) of prorietary knowledge. Most of that rests with the suppliers. And that knowledge and technology, for the most part, is available to all airframers, not just the prime contractor, as the same supply base sells essentially the same products to Airbus.

For example, our company won the 5000 psi hydraulic pumps on the A380. Guess who funded that technology - the US government! We are using our lessons learned on the V-22 and F/A-18E/F (the only 5000 psi aircraft today) to design the best 5000 psi pumps possible for Airbus.

Pete


User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2998 times:

Question for the anti-Airbus people.

The Europeans on here openly admit that Airbus receives subsidies - (now here is the tricky part) - do you admit that Boeing receives any subsidies?

Simple question - a Yes or No answer will suffice

RickB


User currently offlineBobrayner From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2003, 2227 posts, RR: 6
Reply 20, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2963 times:

The economics of some of the more extreme claims puzzles me.

Why would any European governments want to spend billions cutting back the price tags on airliners sold to other people? It seems unusually generous, and altruistic.



Cunning linguist
User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 2906 times:

This thread is nothing more than the same "blah blah blah" from both sides of the Atlantic.

Nobody is going to convince anybody of anything, so why try?

N


User currently offlineRickb From United Kingdom, joined May 2003, 243 posts, RR: 9
Reply 22, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2881 times:

Gigneil,

Well said !!!

RickB


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 859 posts, RR: 2
Reply 23, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 2801 times:

All I gotta say is:
Read and weap..
 Big thumbs up
Michael/SE



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineGoAibusGo From Netherlands, joined Mar 2001, 276 posts, RR: 2
Reply 24, posted (11 years 2 months 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 2718 times:

It was only a matter of time, but it is FINALLY here : Airbus pulls ahead !

"IF your product is superior, it is natural that you will be nr. 1, even if you weren't the first"



25 ConcordeBoy : Although I really can't understand why AA has those A300-605R's. Do they really provide something over 767-200s or 757s or what have you? They certai
26 Post contains images A340600 : "but don't be expecting to be seeing many of those parked at American airports as soon as they come out. Lot of proving for that plane to do first bef
27 Futureualpilot : I personally dont think Airbus is "ahead" of Boeing. They just have gotten much more publicity than Boeing because of the recent success of their deli
28 Post contains images EmiratesA345 : What you personally think, means nothing. Facts are facts. EmiratesA345
29 B2707SST : Osteogenesis: Undoubtedly the biggest growth will continue to be in Asia, but improving financial health among the US carriers will enable them to beg
30 Post contains links Planemaker : Delta-flyer: The article gives an overview of the history and progress of Airbus starting from its origins within the context of European aviation: Da
31 Futureualpilot : Somebody in this post said that Boeing has delievered 184 a/c to Airbuses 181.....facts are facts....
32 Post contains links Rickb : Airbus website is now saying 2003 deliveries = 199 Guess facts are facts after all http://www.airbus.com/doc/media/ordersndeliveries/od_sep03.xls Chec
33 Futureualpilot : Ok, I was wrong, I apologize, I was just goin off what somebody said earlier this post. (I didnt mean to be rude to anybody if I was)
34 Rickb : Futureualpilot, No worries - you weren't rude - I thought you where right - I had the spreadsheet open from another topic for someone who wanted to kn
35 Futureualpilot : http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2003/q4/nr_031002a.html facts are facts, check out the totals....
36 Futureualpilot : Haha, ok RickB I think we need to get our facts straight...lol
37 Post contains links Rickb : Futureualpilot - who knows - neither side seems that keen on updating their website :- http://active.boeing.com/commercial/orders/displaystandardrepor
38 Rickb : Futureualpilot, I think our only option is to count them leaving the factory...lol RickB
39 Post contains images Futureualpilot : Good point, I say we wait till december and both companies put out their totals publicly! But that link you gave does say deliveries through Aug. 2003
40 N844AA : These types of threads depress me. So much wasted energy, so many cheap shots, so many out of context statistics. So much wasted time. Here are the fa
41 Rickb : N844AA, Excellent points !! and I can't disagree with a single one !! RickB[Edited 2003-10-06 01:50:52]
42 N844AA : Rickb -- I just find it so frustrating when people drag down these discussions with mindless dogma. Like Boeing supporters ascribe all of Airbus's suc
43 Post contains images Delta-flyer : Planemaker ... thanks for the excellent synopsis. I was quite an aviation fan growing up in the 60's and vaguely remember those early days that you de
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
How'd they do that? posted Fri Mar 12 1999 17:35:02 by Brandon
How Do They Do That posted Thu May 13 2004 17:12:46 by Jarek
Low Fare Flights, How Can They Do That? posted Thu May 31 2001 15:08:22 by Aerokid
How Did They Do That? posted Tue Mar 30 1999 04:28:06 by Cody
How Do They Do That? posted Mon Sep 3 2001 23:20:46 by BA-747
Legend Airlines--can They Do That? posted Wed Jan 26 2000 19:12:47 by Hypermike
Lots Of New Airlines -- But How Long Do They Last? posted Thu Apr 6 2006 05:10:13 by FlightShadow
SkyTeam Miles: How Much Do They Cost? posted Thu Oct 13 2005 09:35:22 by Hardiwv
JAL & Singapore..How Do They Do It? posted Thu Feb 5 2004 16:51:27 by Learjet23
GE90 777s, How Powerful Do They Feel? posted Thu Jul 24 2003 13:21:55 by 3green