Milan320 From Poland, joined Jan 2005, 866 posts, RR: 12 Posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 7158 times:
Did a search for this, but couldn't find it. If it's been posted already, my apologies.
Anyway, according to Airwise News (article dated Sept. 23rd), according to Airbus, the A380 is back on track:
Luchtvaartnieuws is reporting that after Airbus hired extra personnel they have solved the issues surrounding the delay. Whether this indeed means that they have caught up on the 6 months delay or that there just won't be any more delays is unclear from the article. The article does say that the solution has been found without further exceeding the budget, which according to the article has been exceeded bij 1,45 billion euros.
NAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9078 posts, RR: 37 Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 6562 times:
Airbus hope to avoid any further delays on the A380. However, delivery date to Singapore Airlines is now quoted as 'November or December. 2006, which is later than the October date previously stated.
"The first plane due to be delivered commercially is one of five A380s taking shape under an undercoat of green paint in the assembly plant, with only the livery on the tail giving away its future owner -- Singapore Airlines, which will receive the plane in November or December 2006.
Slarty From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 342 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6273 times:
"Airbus new Chief Executive Gustav Humbert told French reporters last week the cost of these would be less than 100 million euros but rowed back on Thursday, saying the final figure needed to be negotiated."
If it's "back on track" how come they still talk ~ 100M Euros for late payments???
Are they pre-announcing that they intend to still be 6 months late?
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 8): Airbus hope to avoid any further delays on the A380. However, delivery date to Singapore Airlines is now quoted as 'November or December. 2006, which is later than the October date previously stated.
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21026 posts, RR: 60 Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 6218 times:
Yes, once again an A booster posts a misleading topic title. The A380 program is clearly NOT "back on track" but is "experiencing no further delays based on their new delayed delivery schedule" and anyone who tries to claim that is the same thing is fooling themselves.
Why must pro A people post misleading titles and anti-B people do the same? The truth is interesting enough, no?
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
NAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9078 posts, RR: 37 Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 6106 times:
7-8 months, Slarty.
That will be especially bad news for SIA. The November/February period is 'summer high season' in the Southern Hemisphere. Up to now, Singapore will have been hoping to have a free high-season run at the 'Kangaroo Route' - given that their competitors, like Qantas and Emirates, were definitely going to have to wait till 2007 for their A380s.
Now it looks as if they'll miss out on most, if not all, of the 2006/7 high season, like the rest. If they don't even take delivery of the first aircraft till November, there seems no way they can get enough into service to service the Christmas rush.
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
Milan320 From Poland, joined Jan 2005, 866 posts, RR: 12 Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4977 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11): Yes, once again an A booster posts a misleading topic title.
I know you like to attack me, whenever I say anything about Airbus but this time I didn't make the headline but the author of the article where the link points to. I mearly copied it, but I guess you couldn't see that. If you have a beef with that, take it with them. I'm sure there's a contact e-mail at the end of it.
-Milan320
Astuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9135 posts, RR: 96 Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4740 times:
Quoting Kappel (Reply 4): The article does say that the solution has been found without further exceeding the budget, which according to the article has been exceeded bij 1,45 billion euros.
Interestingly, the $1.77Bn cost "growth" was mis-reported on here as actual growth, but was determined by Airbus at the time as "Cost growth RISK".
One assumes that there was already some idea of the programme delay due to harness re-design when the risk review was done.
Hence the comment "no further cost growth"..
I side with Ikramerica on this one - "back on track" means the programme is back in full swing with no FURTHER delay....
WhiteHatter From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 4585 times:
Sorry cheerleaders, but that article could equally read that the particular aircraft being painted in SQ colours is to be delivered at the time stated.
As it is prt of the test program then there may well be another frame delivered to SQ prior to that. Line number 5 could be the first to be delivered, not 3 which is now being built and will join the test flying.
Dazeflight From Germany, joined Jun 1999, 576 posts, RR: 3 Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3762 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11): Yes, once again an A booster posts a misleading topic title. The A380 program is clearly NOT "back on track" but is "experiencing no further delays based on their new delayed delivery schedule" and anyone who tries to claim that is the same thing is fooling themselves.
Why must pro A people post misleading titles and anti-B people do the same? The truth is interesting enough, no?
Shut up already. The first article of them all, the one in the Spiegel magazine, clearly stated that they where back on track (read: no 6 month delay any more). It was later revised, as has been stated here before.
And yes, this posts topic title is the exact title of the quoted article. So where's your problem? Obviously you can't do without a 'lil A. vs. B. retoric. That's nothing else but piss-poor.
Slarty From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 342 posts, RR: 0 Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 3646 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 15): I side with Ikramerica on this one - "back on track" means the programme is back in full swing with no FURTHER delay....
But a FURTHER delay, it appears *was* snuck into the announcement ... as per NAV20's post:
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 8): However, delivery date to Singapore Airlines is now quoted as 'November or December. 2006, which is later than the October date previously stated.
So delivery to SQ could now be 7-8 months late now, rather than the 6 months that had been officially reported before? If so, the title for this journalistic blather is even more inappropriate ... LOL
Glideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1542 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3368 times:
Quoting Sebolino (Reply 5): It was NAV20 most probably. He also said that Airbus was heading to bankruptcy. 2 or 3 years more and that will be over .
Total Hogwash. Airbus has a good 5 years left. Give or take 20 weeks.
"All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved"
RJ777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 1471 posts, RR: 2 Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3326 times:
There was also an article on that website saying that Air Canada had reached an agreement with it's pilots regarding the 777s and 787s. Does this mean the order will soon be back on?
Glideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1542 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3282 times:
Quoting Dazeflight (Reply 17): Shut up already. The first article of them all, the one in the Spiegel magazine, clearly stated that they where back on track (read: no 6 month delay any more). It was later revised, as has been stated here before.
And yes, this posts topic title is the exact title of the quoted article. So where's your problem? Obviously you can't do without a 'lil A. vs. B. retoric. That's nothing else but piss-poor.
The problems are that news out of Toulouse these days is no different than 346 revenue performance figures. Or, to say, "The Twilight Zone."
Every airline knows it as well. Oh, by the way, anyone heard form Mr. Leahy latey? He is the reason Airbus is in it's current position with all his wild hype and fiction during the lead up to the 380.
Of course one cant blame him for the redesigns of the (F) & (R) Fuse, Wing Structure, Gear, and Horizontal Stab Harmonics.
I'm sure things will be relatively ok at some point. However, SQ taking delivery in 7-8 months is a dream as of today. They will wait though. As the airframes will be mostly cost free by the time they take delivery.
"All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved"
Glideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1542 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3265 times:
Quoting RJ777 (Reply 20): There was also an article on that website saying that Air Canada had reached an agreement with it's pilots regarding the 777s and 787s. Does this mean the order will soon be back on?
Yes. Air Canada has been burning the midnight oil behind the scenes to keep what is left of their slots.
Kudos to Boeing for leaving the door slightly open for them. Boeing could have easily done away with all the slots.
"All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved"
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21026 posts, RR: 60 Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 3230 times:
Quoting Milan320 (Reply 14): All those people you speak of must have learned it from the pro-B anti-A people who do the same!!!
Pardon me, I mistyped and was not trying to start a flame war by any means, but trying to STOP such wars for maybe one thread.
I meant to type:
"Why must pro A people post misleading titles and anti-A people do the same? The truth is interesting enough, no?"
I was not implying it was only one sided, only my typo did result in that coming out.
Quoting Milan320 (Reply 13): I know you like to attack me, whenever I say anything about Airbus but this time I didn't make the headline but the author of the article where the link points to. I mearly copied it, but I guess you couldn't see that. If you have a beef with that, take it with them. I'm sure there's a contact e-mail at the end of it.
Sorry, but that's no excuse. You can quote anyone you want, but that doesn't make what they say true or your motivations neutral.
But if you must quote misleading headlines, you also MUST use quotes yourself. If those are not your words, you MUST use quotes to reflect that, or you are seen to either agree with the words, or worse, you are attributing someone else's words to yourself.
Next time you quote somebody else, especially in a topic heading, and don't want to take any responsibility for it you should try this:
"A380 Back On Track After Delays" says article
Anyone who read that title would not have the right to think you had any personal bias nor that you were taking someone else's words.
And as my typo shows, mistakes are made all the time. But when I notice a mistake, I don't get all bitter and defensive, but correct myself. So now you know that in the future, words that are not your own need to be attributed.
Oh, and movie titles should be in quotes or italics as well.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
Mariner From New Zealand, joined Nov 2001, 22707 posts, RR: 88 Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 3159 times:
Quoting Milan320 (Thread starter): Anyway, according to Airwise News (article dated Sept. 23rd), according to Airbus, the A380 is back on track:
Thank you for posting that, Milan320.
I plan to book myself on an early flight, so, at my age, when it enters service is of considerable interest to me.
If SQ or QF don't bring it to AKL, I'll just have to go to where the plane is.
Odd that so many people here don't find this exciting - or even interesting, it seems.
cheers
mariner
aeternum nauta
25 Jacobin777: try EK, I'm sure you'll get on theirs..... I don't like to fly on the 747 as it is, much less potentially flying on TheWhaleJet with 450-500 others..
26 Mariner: I'm not sure that Emirates have plans for the A380 at AKL yet? I love the 747, especially the 400. It give me a sense of "going somewhere", not just
27 Jacobin777: not sure myself..I wouldn't think there would be a market for that route justifying The WhaleJet... last time I flew on a 747-400 was in Jan 2004 BA-
28 Mariner: You can only be comfortable in a 777? Gosh. I agree. How sad is that? cheers mariner
29 Jacobin777: quite honestly, I'm not sure what I meant by that statement.... ...maybe I shouldn't be watching American football while typing responses on A.net...
30 NAV20: This paragraph in the original story caught my eye:- "Airbus new Chief Executive Gustav Humbert told French reporters last week the cost of these woul
Sponsor Message: 
From Poland, joined Jan 2005, 866 posts, 
From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, 
From India, joined Feb 2005, 6715 posts, 
From New Zealand, joined Dec 2003, 11308 posts, 
From France, joined May 2001, 3667 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2803 posts, 
From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9078 posts, 
From Canada, joined Sep 2005, 342 posts, 
From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21026 posts, 
From Germany, joined Jun 1999, 576 posts, 
you should try this:
Printer friendly format 
