Basically it says delivery may now be early 2007. This contrasts with the comments made in Der Spiegel by a highly placed Airbus source.
Keeping in mind, another A.net member's concerns from the last A380 thread please try not to be prejudicial when speculating.
Also, in my opinion if an aircraft does not meet its target weight (Range, relaibility, etc..) or it is delayed by more than 6 months (?) this does not mean that the Aircraft manufacturer will go under or that the plane will not fly. Think of the MD 11. But it is good to discuss these things.
Peace.
Sal
Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
Elvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3 Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 7831 times:
Hi CHRISBA777ER,
I am not sure what you mean. The article states that the GP powerplant was delivered on Sep. 28. But you are correct in that the RR are a bit late. But this points to a bit of a disconnect between this article and the Der Spiegel interview.
Peace.
Elvis777
Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
Elvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3 Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7646 times:
Hi Astuteman!
You are of course right. That is what it says.
"First deliveries to launch customer Emirates are now provisionally expected in early 2007 –- sometime between February and April that year – rather than late 2006 as previously planned. The delay is in line with the six-month slip expected for the Rolls-Royce Trent 900-powered variant."
However, I thought that if the deliveries occurred in 2007 the delay would be greater than 6 months. I hope I did not make a mistake. Otherwise i will have to eat humble pie!
Peace
Elvis777
Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 7509 times:
Quoting Elvis777 (Reply 4): Otherwise i will have to eat humble pie!
I don't think the EK (Engine Alliance powered variant) delivery has slipped any further since the delay was officially announced; its deliveries were always scheduled to be several months after SQ took delivery of its RR powered variant.
Lightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 10661 posts, RR: 100 Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 7415 times:
Quoting Leelaw (Reply 5): I don't think the EK (Engine Alliance powered variant) delivery has slipped any further since the delay was officially announced; its deliveries were always scheduled to be several months after SQ took delivery of its RR powered variant.
I concur. These "early birds" will help decide which engine rules the A380. Right now, its really looking to be a tie.
Off topic, but related: Does anyone know the status of the EK terminal being built to serve their flock of A380's?
Dynkrisolo From United States of America, joined Feb 2001, 1834 posts, RR: 7 Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 5229 times:
Quoting Elvis777 (Reply 4): However, I thought that if the deliveries occurred in 2007 the delay would be greater than 6 months. I hope I did not make a mistake. Otherwise i will have to eat humble pie!
No, there is no further delay. Originally, the first T900-powered 380 was to be delivered to SQ in the first half of 06. Now, it's slipped to the second half. The first EA-powered 380 was to be deliver in the second half of 06. Now, it's slipped to the first half of 07. So, this report is still consistent with the 6-month delay.
Wiggidy From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 113 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3782 times:
Quoting USADreamliner (Reply 10): think of the MD-11???
What happened to MDD in 1995..?
Elvis777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, RR: 3 Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 3729 times:
Hello everyone
it does appear that I misunderstood the contents of the article . As such I will have a big serving of humble pie . If I knew how to withdraw this thread I would . I am fully acknowledging my mistake .
So as not to perpetuate this thread I will politely declined to answer or comment to the post by USA dreamliner . Not shirking the discussion just trying to correct a mistake by ending this thread . Next time I will discuss your question USAdreamliner
peace
Elvis777
Leper,Unevolved, Misplaced and Unrepentant SportsFanatic and a ZOMBIE as well
DAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 4 Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2554 times:
Quoting Astuteman (Reply 3): As FI article says, delay to Alliance engined A380 programme is consistent with the overall 6 month programme delay.
Perhaps this was the true source of the delay, not seating designs or some other things?
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 360 posts, 
From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 9135 posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2005, 1636 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
