Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Vs. Boeing At Farnborough: Seattle PI  
User currently offlineUnited777 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 1657 posts, RR: 0
Posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7621 times:

This was published in today's edition of the Seattle PI. Doesn't look like 7E7 orders will be announced. There could be a 777 order.

What a surprise, VS is expected to order more Airbus A340-600's. I wonder if anybody actually thought they would order the 777-300ER.

Story link: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/181957_air14.html

25 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineWhitehatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 7507 times:

What a surprise, VS is expected to order more Airbus A340-600's.

Don't be so sure....they could even order both!

It's definitely a possibility, and would be just like Branson to squeeze both sides to get a deal on both aircraft types.


User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 47
Reply 2, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7413 times:

So we are going to see an all AIRBUS show then? NICE  Laugh out loud


Sources say Virgin Atlantic has decided to buy more A340-600s from Airbus rather than Boeing's 777-300ER. Branson raised industry eyebrows in 2002, especially those at Boeing and with the engine makers, by saying Virgin's passengers felt safer on the four-engine A340 than on Boeing's two-engine 777.

Oh well it says B. might be able to sell some B777 too...

Boeing, on the other hand, may announce an order for about a half dozen 777s. And that's about it.


Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough...

Another possible Airbus order with Boeing implications could come from Cebu Pacific, the Philippine carrier that has been looking to replace its fleet of old DC-9s. In a blow to Boeing's struggling 717, Cebu Pacific has reportedly decided on the Airbus A319. Boeing badly needs new orders to keep the 717 program going.

Exit B717 so it seems...


And just like a frustrated sour looser is supposed to do in that case...

Just before the Farnborough show, B.s CEO Stonecipher told the industry publication Flight International that Boeing might take unspecified action regarding Airbus subsidies.

Oh boy, is B. again going to waste time, money and energy over this pointless discussion? As if they have any chance for success....  Insane











User currently offlineVoodoo From Niue, joined Mar 2001, 2074 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 7337 times:

Interesting in the latest Flight Int. mag, Stonecipher talks about `why I decided to merge with Boeing'. Who took over who? The guy is still walking and talking McDD!
Another interesting comment: `we have lots of cash...just need a program to put it into.'
For all intents and purposes, Boeing is now McDD!



` Yeaah! Baade 152! Trabi of the Sky! '
User currently offlinePANAM_DC10 From Australia, joined Aug 2000, 4118 posts, RR: 90
Reply 4, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 7328 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
COMMUNITY MANAGER

Well Boeing let's their customer's announce their orders when it suits the customer. Boeing has stopped saving orders for Airshows. I thought that with the launch of the 7E7 we may have seen a slight change this year. It doesn't look so.

As for B777 order maybe Boeing will confirm Air NZ's commitment for 8.

Anyway, we don't have to wait until next week. Etihad Airways will announce an Airbus, maybe Boeing order on Saturday according to Bloomberg.

By James Cordahi
July 14 (Bloomberg) -- Etihad Airways, Abu Dhabi's first
national airline, will buy as many as 38 aircraft worth about $6
billion from Airbus SAS and possibly Boeing Co. as the carrier
seeks to more than quadruple its fleet by 2009.
The government-owned airline, which started in November, will
acquire Airbus A330-model planes as well as either Airbus A340
models or Boeing 777s, Kevin Steele, the carrier's head of sales,
said in an interview in Abu Dhabi.
``Our objective is to be a 50 aircraft company by 2009, so
that's a significant step from where are now with six aircraft,''
Steele said. The order will be announced Saturday by company's
chairman, Sheikh Ahmed bin Saif al-Nayhan, Steele said.

Looks to be quite a large order!!!!



Ask the impossible to achieve the best possible
User currently offlineMidnightMike From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2892 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7167 times:

I would be very surprised if not "1" 7E7 order was announced. I like the part the Cebu could/may announce an order for the 717, now that would be nice.





NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 47
Reply 6, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7134 times:

What part of the Cebu order announcement did you like then, MidnightMike?

I suppose you misread it....

Another Airbus order with Boeing implications could come from Cebu Pacific, the Philippine carrier that has been looking to replace its fleet of old DC-9s. In a blow to Boeing's struggling 717, Cebu Pacific has reportedly decided on the Airbus A319.


User currently offlineSafetyDude From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 3795 posts, RR: 15
Reply 7, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 7100 times:

Yep, Boeing said that it was not "playing games" at airshows any more.

The government-owned airline, which started in November, will
acquire Airbus A330-model planes as well as either Airbus A340
models or Boeing 777s

Okay, this is a no-brainer. The airline is going to order 330s and either 340s or 777s. This is not that I do not want to see Boeing get an order, but why on Earth would they order 777s if they are already going to have an Airbus product that is so similar to the 340?  Nuts

On a side note, I really love this line, "With Branson surrounded by the kind of lovely ladies usually found on Page Three of the British tabloids".  Laugh out loud

-Will



"She Flew For What We Stand For"
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 8, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7055 times:

This is not that I do not want to see Boeing get an order, but why on Earth would they order 777s if they are already going to have an Airbus product that is so similar to the 340?

The 777 is a great airplane. Especially when you compare the 772ER to the A343, the Boeing aircraft has a solid advantage in terms of payload, range, and economics. And many airlines opperate the A330 and 777 side by side.

Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough...

Interesting that you give credit to Airbus for destroying the 717. Airbus was likely the second to last factor for the 717's demise, largely due to the fact that Airbus does not have an aircraft in this segement. If the A319 is destroying the 717 then the 73G is equal to blame.

So we are going to see an all AIRBUS show then? NICE

Given that it's Boeing's practice to put the emphasis on the customer, they announce orders when they see fit. If the customer wants the order to be announced at an airshow, so be it, but note that it is likely SQ will sign the 7E7 a few weeks after the airshow.

This was published in today's edition of the Seattle PI. Doesn't look like 7E7 orders will be announced. There could be a 777 order.

I wouldn't be suprised if Boeing is playing down the possibility of a 7E7 order. Like I said, a 7E7 order is expected after the show, but if SQ wanted some PR (and they usually do) they might sign early.


User currently offlineSandiaman From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 88 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 7009 times:

Any word on potential A380 orders to be announced at the show? Earlier this year, Airbus said they expected to add a new Asian customer this year.

User currently offlineWhitehatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6995 times:

Boeing are right about airshows.

They are pointless for airliner sales. The deals are long and drawn-out, taking months to arrange financing and all the stuff that goes into the purchase.

Airshows like Farnborough and Paris are more for military and bizjet customers where CEOs and Generals can be wined and dined as they look at the products. Announcing airliner sales at a show doesn't generate any business at that show.


User currently offlineTransPac From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 108 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 6958 times:

Eh, no news here. Typical Wallace over-dramatization if you ask me... *yawn*

User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 12, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6769 times:

Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough...

Interesting that you give credit to Airbus for destroying the 717. Airbus was likely the second to last factor for the 717's demise, largely due to the fact that Airbus does not have an aircraft in this segement. If the A319 is destroying the 717 then the 73G is equal to blame.

DfwRevolution, either you meant to say "If the 318 is destroying...", or you forgot about the fact that Airbus has a plane below the 319...

Anyhow, I completely agree with you that the 73G and 318 are probably not the real factors responsible for the 717's demise - I'd say the larger regional jets are much more responsible for that.

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineDl021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11446 posts, RR: 76
Reply 13, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 6702 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

While I agree that the day for the big Airshow deal is changing, I have to disagree about the 717, there is a market for the 110 seat short to medium range jet...Delta has 50 of them flyin right now (B732). The problem with adding more is the when you add the purchase expense of a new aircraft to the union pilot contracted payrates to the financial condition of the airlines you get the main reasons for the 717 not gaining customers beyond Air Tran and a few others to this point.

If Delta or American did not have to pay pilots of these 100 seat class the greater amounts then these two airliines would not be putting all the 40-70 seat jets out there with their affiliated regional carriers. Air Tran proved that with all other things equal the larger jet is better for most of their regional routes.



Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 851 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6613 times:

This was absolutly fantastic reading for me............YEESSSS  Big thumbs up

I take it with a pinch of salt though, Boeing might have an ace up their sleve!

Mike//SE
*way to go, Rick*



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineHz747300 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2004, 1656 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6582 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Larger regional jets are what are to blame. But the news from Boeing this morning by REUTERS, seems to indicate that the 7E7 is getting interest. I like the policy of leaving it up to customers to make the announcement, as anything else shows a sign of weakness.


Keep on truckin'...
User currently offlineConcordeBoy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 6567 times:

but why on Earth would they order 777s if they are already going to have an Airbus product that is so similar to the 340?

...for the same reason CX, AF, KL, KE, EK, MH, CZ, MS, TG, etc all did, perhaps?


User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 851 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 5919 times:

My guess is EK order 772LR instead of 773ER....but that´s just my 50 öre Big grin

Mike



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineWindshear From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 2330 posts, RR: 11
Reply 18, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 7 hours ago) and read 5516 times:

Sabenapilot

I am not going to comment what you said here, but I would like to say that you should rethink the way you post...

Let it be topics in the non aviation forum, or A. vs. B. it's always best to try and not shine through too much...

Boaz...



"If you believe breaking is possible, believe in fixing also"-Rebbe Nachman
User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 19, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 5354 times:

I take it with a pinch of salt though, Boeing might have an ace up their sleve!

Yes they announced a performance enhancing package for the 777 today that will enter service in 2005 and increase range of the 773ER by 2.2% and decrease fuel burn by 2.0%. Not an order, but a nice touch for Bastille Day.

DfwRevolution, either you meant to say "If the 318 is destroying...", or you forgot about the fact that Airbus has a plane below the 319.

No I meant the A319. Refer to Reply 2 and note that the 717 lost to the A319. The A318 is probably a closer competitor to the 717, so I'd tend to agree with you, but of all the causes of the 717's demise... the A319 is low on the list.


User currently offlineAvObserver From United States of America, joined Apr 2002, 2470 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 5218 times:

Sabenapilot, Windshear has a valid point about your posts. Now, Solnabo is being far more diplomatic, despite his bent (thanks, Michael). And it's a little early to gloat, there could be some surprises, despite predictions.

"So we are going to see an all AIRBUS show then? NICE"

Nice that Airbus, unlike Boeing, sets aside orders specifically to announce at the show.

"Boeing, on the other hand, may announce an order for about a half dozen 777s. And that's about it."

As WhiteHatter said, don't count out a VS 777 order just yet, despite reports. Branson said this spring that it was a distinct possibility VS might order both.

"Seems A. is also going to finish off yet another member of the B. product line at Farnborough..."

Hardly, Cebu really needed a larger airplane, even Boeing admitted that.

"Exit B717 so it seems..."

A premature assessment, there are other prospects, possibly even Northwest.

"And just like a frustrated sour looser is supposed to do in that case..."

Just before the Farnborough show, B.s CEO Stonecipher told the industry publication Flight International that Boeing might take unspecified action regarding Airbus subsidies.

"Oh boy, is B. again going to waste time, money and energy over this pointless discussion? As if they have any chance for success...."

Though Airbus says it complies with the 1992 accord, Boeing's point is that the accord, itself, is outdated, meant for when Airbus had a small marketshare. That is how the 33% refundable loan arrangement was justified to the US. Now that Airbus is dominant, Stonecipher says it no longer makes sense and he's willing to open Boeing's books to discuss military underwriting of BCA if EADS is willing to do the same, along with Washington state tax breaks and undoubtedly Japanese government funding to 7E7 subcontractors, there. I think BOTH makers will have to open their books and a new EU/US agreement on this issue will have to be negotiated. If the US government backs up Boeing with the WTO, there's indeed a chance to get this done; if not, a trade war may erupt, which really doesn't help anybody. If nothing is renegotiated, the US government may well begin giving BCA the same 33% refundable loan arrangement insomuch as EADS growing military business is underwriting Airbus in much the same way as Boeing military helps BCA. Perhaps you have a specific reason why Airbus should continue to receive startup launch aid when it is now the industry Goliath to Boeing's David; love to hear it.



User currently offlineGigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16347 posts, RR: 85
Reply 21, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 4 hours ago) and read 5013 times:

The Seattle P-I never ceases to entertain me.

Its like a little piece of Toulouse right there in Washington.

N


User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 22, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4971 times:

I wonder about this Stonecipher person. Is he trying to divert attention from the grotesque error in not going ahead with the latest 777s as originally planned.

I agree the 777-200LR is going to be a brilliant jet, but it hasn't even flown yet. It was supposed to have been in service in late 2003. What a joke. It is no good having outstanding designs if you don't build them.

Besides didn't an A340-500 fly Newark to Singapore via UK airspace and across Asia several times recently with every seat occupied, which looks to me like a 10,000 miles route although one that was chosen because of the benefit of forecast tailwinds giving it a better run than the nominal polar route?

By the time the -200LR is flying there will have been at least 30 months of A340-500 ops which started with Emirates in December 2003.

I just don't think Boeing is getting the executive direction it deserves.

Incidentally in terms of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer being a little bit of Toulouse in Seattle, how about it really being all about Seattle reacting to being sh*t upon from a great height by Boeing over the Chicago move, and continued threats to shift other parts of the operation to China or wherever, which is where Boeing's loyaties seem to lie.

What goes around comes around.






User currently offlineDfwRevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 962 posts, RR: 51
Reply 23, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4951 times:

I agree the 777-200LR is going to be a brilliant jet, but it hasn't even flown yet. It was supposed to have been in service in late 2003. What a joke. It is no good having outstanding designs if you don't build them.

That would be because the airlines who ordered the 772LR didn't want it until 2006. It would have done no good to have it on the market any sooner, and if a customer comes along and does request it, Boeing can accelerate the program and deliver by Q2-Q3 of 2005.

Besides didn't an A340-500 fly Newark to Singapore via UK airspace and across Asia several times recently with every seat occupied, which looks to me like a 10,000 miles route although one that was chosen because of the benefit of forecast tailwinds giving it a better run than the nominal polar route?

And what's more fantastic is a 772LR could do said route with a significantly higher paylod.


User currently offlineUnicorn From Vatican City, joined Nov 2003, 102 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 4884 times:

Don't believe all you read in the Seattle P-I.

Boeing is setting out to hose down expectations, particularly as it looks like Airbus will announce one, and possibly two new customers for the A380.

Thai has said they want the aircraft, while one of the Chinese majors (possibly China Southern) may also be announced as a 380 customer.

On the other hand, Singapore has stated they want the 7E7, so it is possible that Boeing and SQ could make the announcement at the show, particularly if they can steal any of the limelight from Airbus.

It will be an interesting week.

Unicorn


User currently offlineAntares From Australia, joined Jun 2004, 1402 posts, RR: 39
Reply 25, posted (10 years 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 4765 times:

Putting all the hints out there in investment community land together I'll make a prediction.

SQ will order the 777-200LR in modest numbers, perhaps converting unusued options from its original 77 unit order for the 777 family. It would replace all the current US A340-500 services and some more, like non-stops to Chicago and Toronto.

It may hold off a while yet on the 7E7, ready to pick some up from a 'friendly' leasing company if it can eliminate some doubts about what a 'plastic' jet involves in terms of risk as well as benefit.

It will not retire its A340-500s since they are performing well, and could be adapted to serve other routes in a higher seating configuration or used for routes like MEL-LAX or SYD-ORD if they win their campaign for transPac access out of Australia. For example MEL-LAX we have been told an A340-500 would carry more cargo and nearly as many passengers as a 744-ER which is still seriously load limited flying LAX-MEL. Or (I'm only guessing) they might do something startling, like Perth-LAX non stop with the jet.

I think the net result SQ is contemplating is large capacity, A380s and 777-300s, ultra long range, 777-200LR and A340-500s, and for low cost unit Tiger and Silkair regional, the A320 family.

The 7E7s will come in when SQ is fully convinced of their applicability for both long thin routes as a -9 or -8 and as a single class LCC format -3 for slot challenged routes into Japan and holiday operations to Queensland and Tasmania (which currently sees A310s during a limited summer season.)

No I don't have inside information. But I do listen awfully carefully to every inflection. SQ is a very demanding, very careful entity and it is under new 'leadership'.


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...
Airbus And Boeing At Farnborough posted Fri Jul 12 2002 14:42:29 by Leej
Seattle PI: Airbus Vs. Boeing Long Range Jets posted Wed Feb 4 2004 12:20:33 by United777
Forbes Airbus Vs Boeing posted Thu May 25 2006 19:59:50 by DAYflyer
Airbus Vs. Boeing - Fuel Consumption posted Sun Feb 26 2006 20:44:43 by FlyDreamliner
Airbus Vs. Boeing Aircraft Cost posted Sat Oct 29 2005 19:10:01 by 737DAB320
Airbus Outsells Boeing At Paris Air Show posted Thu Jun 16 2005 23:55:28 by QuestAir
Boeing Is Back: Seattle PI Article posted Wed May 11 2005 11:13:47 by United777
Boeing At Farnborough: Why A 747 And Not A 777 posted Mon Jul 26 2004 13:12:16 by Tolosy
Airbus Vs. Boeing (WINDOWS) posted Tue Apr 27 2004 20:42:56 by Benjamin
Airbus Vs Boeing posted Sat Aug 2 2003 08:46:54 by Flybynight