Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
AI-Airbus Crys "unfair"  
User currently offlineMham001 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 3389 posts, RR: 2
Posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10750 times:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1086485.cms

A clip of the article:


Airbus has written to civil aviation secretary Ajay Prasad and to at
least two more officials of the ministry, apart from all A-I board
members about the alleged 'unfair' evaluation. Highly-placed sources
in the ministry said the main charge of Airbus relates to the Boeing
B787 being considered with nine seats in a row in the economy class
instead of the usual eight.

This gives the B787 at least 20 seats more, pushing Airbus A330-200
out of the race in the 200-seater category of medium capacity long
range (MCLR) aircraft.

The seat width was modified in the request for proposal (RFP)
documents to allow B787 the '9-abreast' configuration, instead of the
nor-mal practice of having only eight seats in a row. Airbus has
alleged that all B787 customers, including Continental, Air New
Zealand, Japan Airlines and Vietnam Airlines are going by the '8-
abreast' configuration. The Europe-based aircraft manufacturer has
said A-I evaluation is not done on an equal footing.

The communications to civil aviation ministry officials state that
the B787 should not have been considered in the first place since the
air-craft will not be available till the end of 2008 while the A-I
bid terms stipulate that deliveries should begin by 2007-08.
Questions have been raised about the delivery schedule since Boeing
has already sold 200 B787s, the sources said.

67 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKaran69 From India, joined Oct 2004, 2868 posts, RR: 18
Reply 1, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10727 times:

The story continuoes

User currently offlineBoac707 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2003, 278 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10691 times:

Sounds like someone hit an Airbus nerve...almost sounds desparate, and premature...


smokey classics to the end of time
User currently offlineMrniji From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10691 times:

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):
Airbus has written to civil aviation secretary Ajay Prasad and to at
least two more officials of the ministry, apart from all A-I board
members about the alleged 'unfair' evaluation.

Airbus (as much I like them and prefer them over Boeing) should shut up. It is up to AI (and the corupt GOI) to decide whom they favor.. if Boeing makes a modified and better offer, way to go Boeing. I hope this won't end in a saga.. to reiterate.. it is up to AI to decide, according to their own criteria - if it does not make sense for Airbus.. sorry, dudes


User currently offlineMisbeehavin From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 914 posts, RR: 3
Reply 4, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 10633 times:

Of course it is "unfair" - but that's how politics works. Deal with it.

User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 5, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10604 times:

Quoting Mrniji (Reply 3):
Airbus (as much I like them and prefer them over Boeing) should shut up.

I know you have a preference for the A340 over the 777, but on what basis could you say you prefer the A330 over the 787, since the latter hasn't flown yet?

Anyway, I wonder if they are considering using 9 abreast seating on all routes or just some routes?



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offline727EMflyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 547 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10540 times:

If boeing can offer to squeeze 9 abreast in a 787 (a terrible thing I admit), then why can't airbus do the same in an A330? Come on! If your opponent is going to fight dirty, fight dirty back! This sounds like desperation on A's part to me. The A330 has out-classed the 767 and given a blow or two to the 777 and now they've grown fat resting on their laurels. Now boeing has such a better product that an airline is willing to wait and Airbus is going to do nothing more than throw a tantrum.

User currently offlineMaddy From Germany, joined Aug 2004, 164 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10536 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
Of course it is "unfair" - but that's how politics works. Deal with it.

And Boeing crys about subsidies!?!?!


User currently offlineMidnightMike From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2892 posts, RR: 14
Reply 8, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10469 times:

Quoting Maddy (Reply 7):
Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
Of course it is "unfair" - but that's how politics works. Deal with it.

And Boeing crys about subsidies!?!?!

I thought that Airbus does not receive subsidies?



NO URLS in signature
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 9, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10434 times:

Wait a second? EK flies 777s with 10 abreast all the time, eventhough most carriers fly them with 9. The 787 has plenty of fuselage width for 9 abreast, and the aircraft is being designed with both 8 and 9 abreast configurations in mind, so how in the world can Airbus claim that this is unfair? That makes no sense at all.


Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAvek00 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4282 posts, RR: 20
Reply 10, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10418 times:

There is only ONE way to solve this - the fleet acquisition process MUST begin anew, with the Technical Committee conducting a fresh analysis of ALL the planes suitable for the order. I shall await hearing the results sometime in 2007.  Smile

[Edited 2005-04-24 20:52:08]


Live life to the fullest.
User currently offlineKnoxibus From France, joined Aug 2007, 251 posts, RR: 23
Reply 11, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10415 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Maddy (Reply 7):
And Boeing crys about subsidies!?!?!

Relevance to the post please????

Anyway,

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):
The seat width was modified in the request for proposal (RFP)
documents to allow B787 the '9-abreast' configuration,

I mean it was in the RFP, so the marketing guys at A should deal with it!

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):
the B787 should not have been considered in the first place since the
air-craft will not be available till the end of 2008 while the A-I
bid terms stipulate that deliveries should begin by 2007-08.

Now this is more troublesome, I guess AI can wait two more years before expanding/renewing their fleet.

Knowing the lengthy process of Indian administration and decisions making (no harms done guys, I live in France!!!), I would think it's actually good timing. wink 



No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.
User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 12, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10375 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 9):
so how in the world can Airbus claim that this is unfair?

Since none of us has seen the RFP documents, no-one can be absolutely sure about the background of the complaint, but I'm guessing it has something to do with this:

Quoting Mham001 (Thread starter):
The seat width was modified in the request for proposal (RFP) documents to allow B787 the '9-abreast' configuration

The question could be: when was the seat width modified?

In any case - I wish both companies would get over this letter-writing nonsense: if someone surprises you with something like this, catch them on the wrong foot by offering something else that the customer needs - complaining will hardly give you a better position.

Win on merit - not because the people making the decisions are tired of hearing your complaints.

Both companies have proven again and again that they are capable of winning on merit, both have proven that they're capable of complaining...

And if the B787 is wide enough to accommodate passengers in a 9 abreast config, then it's completely legitimate for Boeing to propose using this config: if the seat- and aisle-width don't drop below what an A330 or A340 would offer with 8 abreast seating, it's completely understandable that Boeing is offering it.

If, on the other hand, the RFP wanted an 8 abreast config with Boeing later being given the opportunity to offer 9 abreast, without Airbus being able to react to that (in whichever way), then I can certainly see why Airbus would be unhappy with the situation.

Regards,
Frank



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineIDAWA From Italy, joined Aug 2004, 303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10333 times:

As long as they manage to evacuate the plane in 90 seconds with half of the exits, and they don't exceed MTOW/MZFW, they may squeeze as many passengers as they want into the 787. It will be up to the passengers to choose if the legroom/seat width is enough or not. And up to Airbus to squeeze as many seats as they want into the A330.

I-DAWA



Flown on: 319, 320, 321, 340, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, 777, DC9, D10, M11, M80, 146, EM2, BEH, CRJ, DH8, L4T.
User currently offlineTexasLonghorn From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 25 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10330 times:

There's nothing UNFAIR about Boeing meeting the request of an airline to add more seats. This is business, and Boeing is doing what it needs to in order to sell its product.

It seems like it woud be expensive to design and manufacture a seat of new width for just several planes. Is it worthwhile for Boeing do do this? Those will be some cramped flights.


User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 15, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10323 times:

Quoting Maddy (Reply 7):
Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 5):
Of course it is "unfair" - but that's how politics works. Deal with it.

And Boeing crys about subsidies!?!?!

I didn't write that

Quoting 727EMflyer (Reply 6):
If boeing can offer to squeeze 9 abreast in a 787 (a terrible thing I admit), then why can't airbus do the same in an A330?



Quoting N1120A (Reply 9):
The 787 has plenty of fuselage width for 9 abreast, and the aircraft is being designed with both 8 and 9 abreast configurations in mind, so how in the world can Airbus claim that this is unfair?

Anyone have the actual cabin width numbers? I recall that the 787 would have thinner walls, so the interior diameter would be greater than would be suggested by the increased exterior diameter. 10" (4" from external width and 6" from internal gains would be enough to make shaving a bearable inch from each of the 8 wider 787 seats.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineTinPusher007 From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 966 posts, RR: 1
Reply 16, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 10311 times:

Quoting 727EMflyer (Reply 6):
The A330 has out-classed the 767

True...

Quoting 727EMflyer (Reply 6):
and given a blow or two to the 777

Since when?



"Flying isn't inherently dangerous...but very unforgiving of carelessness, incapacity or neglect."
User currently offlineN1120A From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 26196 posts, RR: 76
Reply 17, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10276 times:

Quoting Atmx2000 (Reply 15):
Anyone have the actual cabin width numbers? I recall that the 787 would have thinner walls, so the interior diameter would be greater than would be suggested by the increased exterior diameter. 10" (4" from external width and 6" from internal gains would be enough to make shaving a bearable inch from each of the 8 wider 787 seats.

224" fusealge cross section last I checked

Quoting Leskova (Reply 12):
And if the B787 is wide enough to accommodate passengers in a 9 abreast config, then it's completely legitimate for Boeing to propose using this config: if the seat- and aisle-width don't drop below what an A330 or A340 would offer with 8 abreast seating, it's completely understandable that Boeing is offering it.

I am sure the seat and aisle width drop below the A330/A340 on the 777's in 10 abreast, but that does not stop EK from offering them or Boeing for certifying it.



Mangeons les French fries, mais surtout pratiquons avec fierte le French kiss
User currently offlineAtmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 38
Reply 18, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 10213 times:

Quoting N1120A (Reply 17):
224" fusealge cross section last I checked


Is that cabin width, because the external fuselage width is 226"?

The A330 cabin width is 208" for comparison.



ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9925 times:

Quoting Leskova (Reply 12):
Since none of us has seen the RFP documents

Actually, a link to the RFP documents were posted on this website sometime around August-September last year. Like all Air India tenders, you can find them online at http://www.airindia.in while they are active.


User currently offlineFriendlySkies From United States of America, joined Aug 2004, 4091 posts, RR: 5
Reply 20, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9867 times:

Boo hoo...Airbus needs to grow up and realize they aren't entitled to every order.

And even if it was "unfair" as Airbus puts it, that is for the people paying for the airplanes to decide and not the people selling them.


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6289 posts, RR: 54
Reply 21, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9829 times:

OMG. An Indian newspaper puts fifty lines on the net, and all hell breaks lose here at a.net.

Of course the procurement dept at AI knows about every inch and how many millimeters they accept as minimum for a seat. And of course they have a calculator which can divide by numbers like 8 or 9.

Of course 9 abreast on a 330 is senseless.
And of course 8 abreast on a 330 is more comfu than 9 on a dreamliner.
And of course 8 abreast on a dreamliner is more comfu than 8 on a 330.
And of course AI can put any number of seats in, up to the certification limit.
And here the story end.



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9830 times:

I find it somewhat ironic that Airbus is doing this when the Boeing deal won't even be endorsed by the board until Tuesday.  rotfl 

User currently offlineB747-437B From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9819 times:

Quoting Prebennorholm (Reply 21):
Of course the procurement dept at AI knows about every inch and how many millimeters they accept as minimum for a seat. And of course they have a calculator which can divide by numbers like 8 or 9.

Easy there boy. You're jumping to conclusions you don't neccessarily know are true!  Wink


User currently offlineWestWing From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2125 posts, RR: 7
Reply 24, posted (8 years 12 months 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 9670 times:

Quoting B747-437B (Reply 22):
when the Boeing deal won't even be endorsed by the board until Tuesday.

Lets say the AI board approves the aircraft acquisition plan this Tuesday. I assume several Ministry of Civil Aviation bigshots sit on the AI board. So, in theory, if the AI board approves of the plan on Tuesday, the Ministry would too. After this, would full Parliamentary approval need to be obtained ?



The best time to plant a tree is 40 years ago. The second best time is today.
25 B747-437B : The whole deal has already been cleared all the way up and down the food chain for all practical purposes. All that is required is to shuffle the pap
26 777ER : AI are chosing the aircraft that bets suit their operations and it sounds like Boeing best meets their requirments. It is upto the airlines to decide
27 SATX : I suppose this is how they're "dealing with it." Is this from the 'two wrongs make a right' school of thought? Well, the passengers don't have many o
28 Bennett123 : Surely if Boeing and AI are happy with 9 abreast, then no problem. I assume that the certification limit has not been exceeded. Does the certification
29 Atmx2000 : Aren't the charter airlines going to use a 9 abreast arrangement? Moving the goal posts may make sense if you are talking about a one year difference
30 Post contains links NAV20 : Looks like Airbus are desperate to head off Boeing - particularly the 787 - by any means. This says that they are using top-level EU political lobbyin
31 N754PR : Boeing and the USA are always crying like babies, why can't Airbus?
32 FriendlySkies : It's really sad when politics have to decide what equipment an airline should use. Every airline should use what's best for them, not what's best for
33 Misbeehavin : I concur. But if an airline is state owned, such as Air India or LOT (see NAV20's post above) politics will play a big part. There's no way around it
34 727EMflyer : IIRC NW gave the 777 consideration when the A340 deal fell through. That's one. Granted I am not a scholar of airline bidding and purchasing, but cer
35 N60659 : Pitting the A330 against the 787 (assuming Boeing delivers everything it has promised, which I think they will) has a lot more significant pitfalls fo
36 Alitalia744 : Does Airbus bitch when charter airlines put 9 abreast in the A330? I'm sorry...Pot, meet Kettle.
37 Post contains links and images LH423 : View Large View MediumPhoto © Daniel Hamer So I'm guessing Airbus would have recommended that Monarch NOT do this? LH423
38 DfwRevolution : I wouldn't go so far as to say that yet. There are a whole lot more comfort features being built into the 787 that the A330/A350 will completly lack.
39 Leskova : Once again, when it comes to Airbus, you - NAV20 - only see one side: the other side is the known fact that the Government of the US, if I recall cor
40 Post contains images HAWK21M : Exactly the GOI decides,not necessary on merit Although its publically stated so. Roy would have loved to coment on this thread. 2007 is too quick It
41 Post contains images NAV20 : Interesting reaction, Leskova   Why is it necessary to 'see both sides'? This is a matter of business and 'consumer preference', not some sort of so
42 MrNiji : My friend, where did I say that? AI should decide on eco-technical criteria 9which is available by now) Yes, I agree.. if politics were the sole fact
43 Atmx2000 : Well I was assuming that you preferred Airbus aircraft for some particular reason other than it was an Airbus aicraft. But that has little to do with
44 Post contains images Mrniji : as a customer, I prefer the 340 over the 777 (smoother). that does not mean that I don't like Boeing They are both amazing, I like them both, only a
45 Trident2e : Airbus should leave this kind of winging and whining to the experts at Boeing.
46 Post contains images HAWK21M : Maybe Reasons for a Particular Decision should be made Public regds MEL
47 Post contains images PANAM_DC10 : Exactly! I thought the Board were to meet Tuesday. Let's wait and see Regards
48 Atmx2000 : I think they already are experts at whining: see ANA narrowbody deal and A320 phase out.
49 Astuteman : I can understand (and dislike) charters putting 9 abreast in A330 over medium haul distances. I find it extraordinary that AI think it is sensible to
50 NAV20 : Astuteman, as far as I know the 787 fuselage is wider than the A330's? 226" compared to 222"? Boeing have been proposing seats an inch or so wider tha
51 777ER : I suppose Airbus will now be crying its unfair that AC have just announced an order for B777s and B787s.
52 Atmx2000 : They may not plan on using 9 abreast for all routes. They could use 9 abreast for shorter routes. Still whether it is comfortable really depends on t
53 TeamREGAL : Good point...I certainly wasn't looking at it from that perspective. But now I see how it makes sense for Airbus to object to AI's seat plans. REGAL
54 Starrion : Could be a VERY bad week for Airbus if both the Air India decision and the Air Canada decision goes 777/787. On the other hand the A380 will have it's
55 Aseem : interesting how diplomacy can convert buyers market into sellers market... rgds Aseem
56 Jwenting : Of course it makes sense. Any deal Airbuddy doesn't get MUST mean foul play by the EVIL Americans. After all, Airbus did everything they could to get
57 NAV20 : Air Canada just placed a very big order - with Boeing.........
58 Shawnnyc : If the 787 are replacing AI's A310s then I think 9 abreast makes sense. AI can have 8 abreast on European routes and 9 abreast on Middle East and SE A
59 Post contains links Havaloc : Which one is smoother? I thought the 777 was the smoother of the two, according to this excellent site http://www.geocities.com/khlim777_my/aswhy777.h
60 AvioGuy : wah wah wah... Airbus needs to stop whining. I know they need to cover costs of production for the A380 but sounding this desperate makes them unprofe
61 Post contains images Mrniji : since this was in reference to my post.. I won't engage in A vs B now..
62 Post contains links and images WestWing : French Transport Minister Gilles de Robien had a meeting with Praful Patel on Monday. (ZeeNews). Patel said that there is no scope for his ministry in
63 Karan69 : HAHAHA, they dont advise they just tell them to re-evaluate
64 Post contains images HAWK21M : Good One regds MEL
65 B707Stu : OK, I've ridden both A340's and 777's. Though I'm sure I'll be accused of being blindly American and pro-Boeing I Have to admit that the 777's ride i
66 Keesje : I think the A340 is quieter, db 's can be measured objectively.
67 Jet-lagged : I agree with that. The A340 is a very nice plane for noise with the smaller engines plus two of them further from the cabin. And Airbus is being a cr
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 Hiring Freeze "Until Further Notice" posted Mon Sep 4 2006 15:15:29 by Revelation
Airbus A319/A320 "Rebooting" Article posted Mon Apr 24 2006 18:14:58 by Mustang304
Prior To Airbus SCE, Who "delivered" For Them? posted Fri Apr 7 2006 17:36:00 by N328KF
Wikipedia.org: "Etihad To Operate Airbus 340-400" posted Sat Jul 23 2005 11:46:34 by Udo
787 Could Reduce Airbus To An "also Ran" posted Wed May 11 2005 11:14:04 by Art
Airbus/boeing, In "the Telegraph" posted Sat Oct 16 2004 16:47:33 by A380900
Boeing CEO: "Why Do (Airbus) Need Subsidies?" posted Fri Jul 2 2004 23:25:45 by Singapore_Air
Airbus Takeoff Engine "Roar": Why? posted Wed Apr 7 2004 11:41:50 by Aguilo
Airbus Delivers First "A318 Double-Decker" posted Fri Jan 16 2004 18:05:29 by Dtwclipper
5/15 WSJ "Takoff Nears For Airbus Superjumbo Jet" posted Tue May 16 2000 19:24:25 by TWFirst