Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Agrees With Boeing On Compsite A/C-?  
User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7451 times:

Looks like Airbus is going to spend 1/2 a billion on composite technology ! Yet, Airbus just recently dogged Boeing regarding composites , but now appears to agree with Boeing's strategy in the future of composite aircraft .

What's up ?



http://www.flightinternational.com/A...ats+200-order+target+for+A350.html

He says too that the price of fuel would be the main factor in determining how fast industry moves to developing an aircraft overwhelmingly built using composites. "If fuel is very expensive, you need an ultra-light aircraft, even if the cost of manufacture is higher," he says.

Airbus will spend €450 million ($540 million) in 2007-08 in developing composite technology. "Low cost industrial composites are the big challenge," he says. "But we will be ready to react."

http://www.flightinternational.com/A...osite+claims+infuriate+Boeing.html

Composite claims infuriate Boeing
Boeing is reassuring airlines over the use of composite material for the primary structure of the 787 following claims by Airbus that the new Boeing twinjet could be grounded “because of a scratch in the paint”.


Halibut

[Edited 2006-01-09 17:49:55]

123 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7124 posts, RR: 57
Reply 1, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7421 times:

Where does the article state that Airbus agrees with boeing? Just because Airbus are investing in composite research, doesnt mean that they will follow Boeings composite usage, especially since Boeing followed Airbus into composites.


The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7380 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
Just because Airbus are investing in composite research, doesnt mean that they will follow Boeings composite usage, especially since Boeing followed Airbus into composites.

Boeing followed Airbus into composites? Ever heard of the US Air Force? They have had composites in aircraft since 1976. I hardly think they are following Airbus into composite use. Yes I know Airbus used composites first on civilian aircraft.

Airbus is following Boeing's lead in the use of an all composite fuselage. How you ask? They got smacked hard by the success of the 787 launch and are now playing catch-up, because they failed to take composites to the next level in commercial aircraft.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineKangar From Ireland, joined Feb 2000, 395 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7305 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
Boeing followed Airbus into composites? Ever heard of the US Air Force? They have had composites in aircraft since 1976. I hardly think they are following Airbus into composite use. Yes I know Airbus used composites first on civilian aircraft.

Whoa - Careful there, that comment might lead readers to think Boeing's civil aviation unit benefitted from developments researched and bankrolled by Military spending!


User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7238 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
Where does the article state that Airbus agrees with boeing?



Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
http://www.flightinternational.com/A...ats+200-order+target+for+A350.html

He says too that the price of fuel would be the main factor in determining how fast industry moves to developing an aircraft overwhelmingly built using composites. "If fuel is very expensive, you need an ultra-light aircraft, even if the cost of manufacture is higher," he says.



Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
Airbus will spend €450 million ($540 million) in 2007-08 in developing composite technology. "Low cost industrial composites are the big challenge," he says. "But we will be ready to react."

There !

Halibut


User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7124 posts, RR: 57
Reply 5, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7238 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
Yes I know Airbus used composites first on civilian aircraft.

This is a civil aviation forum... Boeing followed Airbus into using composites on civil aircraft.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
Airbus is following Boeing's lead in the use of an all composite fuselage

Where have Airbus stated that?



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7229 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):
Where have Airbus stated that?



Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):
Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
Airbus is following Boeing's lead in the use of an all composite fuselage

Where have Airbus stated that?



Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
Airbus will spend €450 million ($540 million) in 2007-08 in developing composite technology. "Low cost industrial composites are the big challenge," he says. "But we will be ready to react."

There !

Halibut


User currently offlineBestWestern From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2000, 7124 posts, RR: 57
Reply 7, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7218 times:

Where in that statement does Airbus say that they agree with Boeing? It doesnt.

Where in that statement does Airbus state that Airbus will introduce an

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
all composite fuselage.

It doesnt.



The world is really getting smaller these days
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 8, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7147 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):

This is a civil aviation forum... Boeing followed Airbus into using composites on civil aircraft.



Irrevelent. Composites don't care whether they're being used in civil or military applications.




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineTheSonntag From Germany, joined Jun 2005, 3571 posts, RR: 29
Reply 9, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 7130 times:

B followed A in terms of Widebody Twins. They followed A in terms of FBW. Now A follows B in building a composite aircraft.

So what? Should A build a steel airplane like the Junkers F-13 from 1920?


User currently offlineHalibut From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7096 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 7):
Where in that statement does Airbus say that they agree with Boeing? It doesnt.



Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
He says too that the price of fuel would be the main factor in determining how fast industry moves to developing an aircraft overwhelmingly built using composites. "If fuel is very expensive, you need an ultra-light aircraft, even if the cost of manufacture is higher," he says.

Airbus will spend €450 million ($540 million) in 2007-08 in developing composite technology. "Low cost industrial composites are the big challenge," he says. "But we will be ready to react."

Airbus now sees the significance of a composite aircraft so much so that they will now spend over 1/2 a billion dollars in composite technology .

Curious that Airbus actknowlegdes this fact soon after the 787 has proven to be a run away hit !

Noel states :

" overwhelmingly built using composites. "If fuel is very expensive, you need an ultra-light aircraft, even if the cost of manufacture is higher," he says."


Looks like Boeing has already spent millions on composite tech. & are a step ahead of Airbus .

If you can't see that Bestwestern , well ?...Then *-!

And you say I am impartial !  boggled 

Halibut


User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21516 posts, RR: 60
Reply 11, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7067 times:

Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 9):
B followed A in terms of Widebody Twins. They followed A in terms of FBW. Now A follows B in building a composite aircraft.

uh, yeah.

Airbus was barely a player in the 70s. MD and Lockheed and Boeing were ALL trying to build a widebody long range twin. Did Airbus succeed where the others failed? Depends. The original A300 didn't have the range or ability required of the DC10 or L1011 (which if equipped with two engines as initially planned would have surpassed the A300 still), nor of the 767 when it was proposed and designed.

It's one thing to copy something that works (FBW), another to look at something that doesn't work and make it work (original A300, DC10, L1011).

Airbus chose to go twin rather than to go long range, and the idea of short range twins wasn't new. DC9 and 737 were both shortrange twins. A300 was just a bigger short range twin using engines developed for long range widebodies.

boeing led the way into long range twins where Airbus, MD and lockheed all failed.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7050 times:

Quoting Halibut (Thread starter):
What's up?

I think that's pretty clear: Airbus will be investing massively in future technologies in the field of composites just like they have in the past.
Half a billion euro is not peanuts, that's BIG money. It can only mean one thing, the successor to the A320 is going to be a lightweight composite plane!

What is worth discussing is however is why many people here have actually come to believe A. is opposed to the use of composites in large structures? Just WHEN and WHERE did A. ever say composite materials are not the way to go? Some people on A.net have always said A said so, but I have never seen a statement from A. saying such.

What A. has repeatedly said is that there are still many issues unresolved with a more important use of composites than currently done and that in their view, the theoretical know-how and much more so the methods of use of this new know-how are not completely matured to offer entire composite fuselage structures already.

It is true that the theoretical know-how on composites has increased steadily and steeply and has certainly reached a pivotal point so as to start dreaming of entire composite structures: The A380 for instance has a fuselage partly made of glare, which until now is the most technological advanced use of composites in an airliner ever! On the other hand, at present nobody really knows just yet how many and what kind of unresolved and unexpected issues there still are to be solved with entire structures. The step from parts of fuselages to entire fuselages might seem only modest, but includes some vital transitions not to be minimized.

Secondly -and much more importantly- there are still unresolved issues with the long-term weir of these structures during intensive use and the best way to check, maintain and if needed repair them. Here, theoretical knowledge alone won't help, only their actual use can bring solutions and A. in my view rightfully put a big question mark next to B.'s extremely confident idea that 'all will be fine, no need to worry', when in fact nobody really knows for sure yet.

This is however something completely different than saying they are against their use, but then nuances have never had a place on A.net, where all needs to be simply black or white.


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 13, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7031 times:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 8):

Irrevelent. Composites don't care whether they're being used in civil or military applications.

I have to agree with BestWestern on this one. Civilian aircraft have to endure more life cycles than military aircraft.

Quoting Halibut (Reply 10):
Curious that Airbus actknowlegdes this fact soon after the 787 has proven to be a run away hit !

A success yes. But a run away hit? As I see it, the A350 is not doing all that bad either. And guess what it does not have a full composite fuselage.

Quoting Halibut (Reply 10):
Looks like Boeing has already spent millions on composite tech. & are a step ahead of Airbus .

What were you expecting? They are building the B787. Am sure that Boeing has spent a good sum on research.

Dont forget that the A380 is currently the leading airplane in terms of composites used, nearly 25% if am not mistaken. Am sure that Airbus is well aware of composites, like am sure that they have done their homework too.

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 14, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7016 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 12):
Secondly -and much more importantly- there are still unresolved issues with the long-term weir of these structures during intensive use and the best way to check, maintain and if needed repair them.



Unresolved issues? Which ones are you referring to, specifically? I find it hard to believe that A) operational issues haven't been encountered and addressed in the past 20 or so years of military use, and B) the FAA will certify an aircraft with said issues.

Boeing isn't stupid. They're not going to invest this heavily in something that isn't all but a sure thing, nor is it in their best interest to misrepresent the facts.




2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineShamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6334 posts, RR: 14
Reply 15, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6996 times:

Quoting WINGS (Reply 13):
A success yes. But a run away hit? As I see it, the A350 is not doing all that bad either. And guess what it does not have a full composite fuselage.

Exactly!! The A350 has supposedly reached it's 200 goal SO it looks like it's doing fine. The 787 did have a head start remember and yes the 787 is a hit but so is the A350.


User currently offlineN328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6484 posts, RR: 3
Reply 16, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6977 times:

Quoting WINGS (Reply 13):
I have to agree with BestWestern on this one. Civilian aircraft have to endure more life cycles than military aircraft.

Tell that to the guys flying C-17s or KC-135s.



When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
User currently offlineToulouse From Switzerland, joined Apr 2005, 2758 posts, RR: 58
Reply 17, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6945 times:

Quoting Kangar (Reply 3):
Whoa - Careful there, that comment might lead readers to think Boeing's civil aviation unit benefitted from developments researched and bankrolled by Military spending!

Brilliant!

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 1):
Where does the article state that Airbus agrees with boeing? Just because Airbus are investing in composite research, doesnt mean that they will follow Boeings composite usage, especially since Boeing followed Airbus into composites.



Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):
This is a civil aviation forum... Boeing followed Airbus into using composites on civil aircraft.

Totally agree with Bestwetern on this.

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 8):
Irrevelent. Composites don't care whether they're being used in civil or military applications.

A different kettle of fish.



Long live Aer Lingus!
User currently offlineStratofortress From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 178 posts, RR: 1
Reply 18, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6913 times:

Quoting Toulouse (Reply 17):
Quoting Kangar (Reply 3):
Whoa - Careful there, that comment might lead readers to think Boeing's civil aviation unit benefitted from developments researched and bankrolled by Military spending!

Brilliant!

I think you meant to say ignorant. Military generally tends to break new grounds and push the technology limits. Once they feel the technology no longer is a matter of national security it starts trickling down into civilian world. EADS does the same thing with Airbus. So the sarcastic argument above holds no water. A (EADS) and B receive support from their respective defense divisions.

Airbus is finally realizing that they are getting spanked in the widebody market, and it is time to catch up to Boeing in respect to composites, hence the heavy investment. While A was pumping money into 380, Boeing was busy working on composites.

Bottom line here is that Boeing has outmaneuvered Airbus, and is focused on execution, while Airbus is focused on catching up technologicaly.



Forever New Frontiers
User currently offlineSabenapilot From Belgium, joined Feb 2000, 2714 posts, RR: 46
Reply 19, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6890 times:

Quoting Stratofortress (Reply 18):
While A was pumping money into 380, Boeing was busy working on composites.

Which is why the A380 has the most advanced use of composites so far... and B was trying to sell the aluminium sonic cruiser for a few years....

Black and white ideas, see what I mean....

[Edited 2006-01-09 20:04:47]

User currently offlineShamrock350 From Ireland, joined Mar 2005, 6334 posts, RR: 14
Reply 20, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6851 times:

Quoting BestWestern (Reply 5):
This is a civil aviation forum... Boeing followed Airbus into using composites on civil aircraft.

I agree.

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 2):
Boeing followed Airbus into composites? Ever heard of the US Air Force?

As said before that is totally different. You cant use that to say the Airbus followed Boeing into composites.


User currently offlineKappel From Suriname, joined Jul 2005, 3533 posts, RR: 17
Reply 21, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6833 times:

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 11):
boeing led the way into long range twins where Airbus, MD and lockheed all failed.

Yes, the a330 is a massive failure... Wink

Quoting Halibut (Reply 10):
Looks like Boeing has already spent millions on composite tech. & are a step ahead of Airbus

I'm willing to bet that Airbus has also spent a lot of money in that research. As mentioned before, the a380 is so far the aircraft with the biggest percentage of composites. (until the 787 flies of course). Besides, the a400M project also gives them a lot of research into composites.

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 12):
the successor to the A320 is going to be a lightweight composite plane!

Most likely yes, especially after these comments.



L1011,733,734,73G,738,743,744,752,763,772,77W,DC855,DC863,DC930,DC950,MD11,MD88,306,319,320,321,343,346,ARJ85,CR7,E195
User currently offlineNW727251ADV From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6811 times:

Quoting Shamrock350 (Reply 20):
As said before that is totally different. You cant use that to say the Airbus followed Boeing into composites.

All you seem to keep doing is attaching "I agree" or whatever to someone else's post. You have yet to post any facts explaining why you agree. You sound like the boy who kicks the guy who got beat up by five other guys at the end of the fight. No courage to jump in you just do your little thing at the end. Please explain yourself with concrete hardcore facts.


User currently offlineWINGS From Portugal, joined May 2005, 2831 posts, RR: 68
Reply 23, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6798 times:

Quoting N328KF (Reply 16):
Tell that to the guys flying C-17s or KC-135s.

How many hours per day are the C-17 and KC-135 up in the air?

How many Takeoff and landings do they perform in one day?

Regards,
Wings



Aviation Is A Passion.
User currently offlineStratofortress From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 178 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (8 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 20 hours ago) and read 6789 times:

Quoting Sabenapilot (Reply 19):
Which is why the A380 has the most advanced use of composites so far... and B was trying to sell the sonic cruiser for a few years....

But 380 is still not the all composite airplane. The 350 is not all composite. Airbus is lagging behind.

SonicCruiser was a strategical diversion.



Forever New Frontiers
25 RichardPrice : If anything, the smaller business jet manufacturers were the ones to get there first with composites to this magnitude as a percentage of the total ai
26 Sabenapilot : OMG.... are you already competing for the most hilarious post of 2006 or what???
27 Leelaw : I'm glad to hear that $500 million in research will lead to solving the durability and safety concerns surrounding the composite hull articulated by
28 Halibut : Yes indeed GLARE ! However , is GLARE being used on the a350 ? If not , then Airbus would need to start over , No ? Halibut
29 Post contains images Halibut : Looks like it worked ! Not only is Sabenpilot fooled but Airbus as well ! Halibut
30 A319XFW : As the A350 design hasn't been frozen yet, there still might be GLARE in it. It's just like with the A vs. B cheerleading matches on A.net, some peop
31 RichardPrice : Why is Airbus lagging behind? Seriously, what law says that the composite used by Boeing is where its at, fullstop and all that jazz? Airbus is putti
32 Sabenapilot : They will lead to more theoretical know-how, showing us yet unknown practical problems, thus turning general concerns into clearly identified problem
33 Stratofortress : Not at all actually. SonicCruiser started off as legitimate project, however after quickly realizing that this really is not where the market is, Boe
34 Shamrock350 : Boeing may well have used composites on military aircraft but as we all know military and civil aircraft are very different, built for different reas
35 Sabenapilot : ROTFL. It is better for your own credibility NOT to continue on this, because I know from first hand (yep some people actually work in airlines, and
36 PlaneDane : Aluminum Sonic Cruiser? Please, provide your sources for this claim. Somehow, I really doubt that anyone at Boeing loses any sleep over whether a Boe
37 Stratofortress : Yep, and some people work for manufacturers.
38 WAH64D : You have been told more than once in other threads that Airbus have no issue with the way Boeing are using composites on the B787. What they have iss
39 Sabenapilot : Certainly not! which is why many people feel relieved to hear Airbus voiced their concerns, because all of a sudden it DID become a big issue for the
40 WAH64D : Manufacturers of what exactly? Rubber Dinosaurs?
41 N79969 : Airbus has benefitted from Pentagon and NASA spending and like to complain. Fly-by-wire flight controls and the A380's 5,000 psi hydraulic system wer
42 N844AA : Back when oil was $15/bbl, the Sonic Cruiser was probably a reasonable guess as to the direction the industry might take. But Boeing took their custo
43 Post contains images MBJ2000 : Right! And besides that commercial aviation doesn't have the money and ressources that military has got in order to keep the stuff up and flying! How
44 Stratofortress : Actually, they are ALL composite dinosaurs. Someday, we will teach Airbus how to do it. Your post is very mature, though. You would be better off lis
45 N79969 : You write some absurd things but this most be the most absurd. I guarantee that exactly nobody fits this description. I am sure that Qantas, Air Cana
46 Post contains images 2H4 : If composite technology is so cost-prohibitive, how do you explain the likes of Raytheon's composite corporate jets? Composite airframe technology is
47 DAYflyer : They will be forced to do so to remain competitive. If the Boeing's composite aircraft save too much fuel, then Airbus has no choice but to follow su
48 Post contains images LifelinerOne : Now tell me which large twins McD and Lockheed designed and built...? And what is the A330 exactly? Cheers!
49 RichardPrice : Why do they *have* to go composite? There are plenty of materials out there with better weight savings than composite, and are easier to work with, b
50 Post contains images BestWestern : Was a what? Yeagh - the Soniccruiser was such a positive PR message! NOT
51 Post contains images WAH64D : Gee, really? Will you teach me how to wave a Boeing flag as good as you?          The only thing to be learned from this thread Stratofortress
52 Dougloid : Nice spin on Glare. I believe it was selected for weight saving, not specifically for safety or durability. However, if you want to take that perspec
53 Stratofortress : Airbus went after the 380, and Boeing went after the SonicCruiser. They were betting on different market trends. I think most of us can agree with thi
54 WAH64D : Agreed 100%. The merits of composite technology are well proven and well known. It is however, worrying to say the least that a major Aircraft manufa
55 Post contains images Stratofortress : This is great. We are back to discussing. And we even agree on something. And since your nickname is a Boeing product , welcome to my respected user
56 Aither : You can't fully investigate all ramp accidents because they happen everyday. Look around the aircraft doors, it seems they all have some "bumps".
57 Glacote : Don't think so. You don't have the same economic constraint: - at built level (over-budget and late programs) - during exploitation (maintainance cos
58 Iwok : I am still lost on this. Do they have over 200 orders, or is it a combination of orders and options? The NASA patent portfolio to which EADS has FREE
59 Shenzhen : Don't think boroscopic inspections will determine if there is delamination, besides most of the fuselage interior is accesible for inspection. There
60 Abba : Oh - you must have forgotten: the 787 is not the all composite airplane... Any prof of that? You know: such sweeping statements are very difficult to
61 BestWestern : Openly following a strategy of marketing a product nobody wants makes you look foolish and arrogant. This was the boeing of the early 2000's. Since t
62 Shenzhen : I suggest you actually read about what the market was saying about the proposed airplane before the floor fell out from underneath the avaition marke
63 Planemaker : FYI, Boeing worked on the 7E7 concept at the same time that they were working on the SonicCruiser concept... and, to put it simply, believed that the
64 Joni : Airbus has been using composites in their civil craft for decades, so they have seen the significance of composites for a long time by now. You shoul
65 Post contains images Shenzhen : Who's to say they didn't or won't. I'm not up on the tax incentives in the EU, but if I were, I'm sure I could find where company X is paying more, o
66 Post contains links and images Halibut : No that's wrong Abba ! The point of this thread is to discuss Airbus's hypocrocy & how they now know they must go Composite to complete ! 1st airbus
67 Post contains links Halibut : http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/business/255066_airbus10.html Forgeard's apparent embrace of a composite fuselage for an A320 replacement was interestin
68 Shenzhen : It is a pretty well known fact that if you work for Airbus or Boeing and show up at a crash site with your Airbus or Boeing cap on, then make comments
69 Scbriml : "Mostly made of" and "entirely made of" (as in 787), would be somewhat different in my book. Until we actually know what Airbus is proposing for its
70 Post contains images NAV20 : Loved this bit in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer article:- "Boeing's sales team soon hit the road with a large piece of the composite material that wi
71 Kangar : Guys, look at this quote, it's the Seattle PI for god's sake. They're practically Boeing's mouthpiece, you can't expect any impartiality from them.
72 Leelaw : You're obviously not a longtime reader of the Seattle PI and/or Jim Wallace, they both have an excellent reputation for good reporting and fairness.
73 N79969 : Nonsense. You apparently have no familarity with the newspaper. Exactly the problem. It is none of Airbus business. Boeing is not playing a role in t
74 NAV20 : Honestly don't understand that comment, Kangar. Are you saying that the journalist made this up to discredit Airbus? "At a news conference Monday in
75 Post contains images Joni : Those were, if you're referring to the launch aid, loans. Boeing's money consists of handouts. Which would you rather take, 3B of interest-bearing lo
76 N79969 : Boeing gets neither the handouts nor the loans. That is European fiction. Like Boeing, Airbus enjoys being part of a large conglomerate that does def
77 Shenzhen : I don't have access to Boeing Bank accounts, but I will be interested in their year end results, as I can't wait to see the 6 billion showing up as a
78 AerospaceFan : And, let's not forget such things as GPS satellites, a multi-billion dollar system made available by Uncle Sam to the entire world, free of charge. I
79 Joni : The 6B figure is a sum of US, Japanese, Italian and Washington State subsidies that we've discussed here on and off for, oh, a year or so by now.
80 Shenzhen : So its not a cash handout.. bummer. Please make up your mind.
81 Kangar : NAV20, They have taken Forgeards comments on the next gen A320 as an about turn on composites in the fuselage, which is incorrect. they have stated A
82 Post contains images Astuteman : I don't think they will be enjoying it that much - Boeing's military counterpart generates substantially higher profit margins than its commercial ai
83 Shenzhen : Now how can I take you seriously if you can't even spell Shenzhen correct. EADS does have mediocre profitability, as does Boeing.. However, I would p
84 Astuteman : My apologies Shenzhen - trying to concentrate on 2 things at once....
85 Shenzhen : No problem, I'm just enjoying myself fanning the flames today. Cheers
86 Leelaw : I don't think the facts support your assertions that the Seattle PI panders to the emotions of the local community regarding its "aerospace reporting
87 WAH64D : My nickname is indeed a Boeing product, in fact one of Boeing's finest. With a slight tinkering of the avionics and firecontrol system by Westland, t
88 Post contains links BoomBoom : http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/busine...s/255066_airbus10.html?source=mypi
89 BoomBoom : Of course the Airbus loans don't have to be repaid if the project is not profitable or does not meet sales targets. Can you say A380? We will give Ai
90 Stratofortress : I am not sure that everybody else caught some of the humor. Either way. Folks, believe it or not, one can be pro Boeing, or pro Airbus and still have
91 Post contains links and images A319XFW : http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4555276.stm And before anyone else quotes it, here some more ammo on Airbus: The first prototype was built by htt
92 Post contains links Halibut : I don't know exactly how much Boeing & Airbus benefit from government military/defence contracts . However , I do feel strongly the Boeing benefits s
93 N79969 : I am not talking about Airbus military products per se, I am saying that Airbus part of EADS. Boeing Commericial Aircraft is part of the Boeing corpo
94 Abba : I do not automatically - as you - trust jurnalists. Not even the 787 is entirely made of composites. Relax - you seem to become rather morally agitat
95 N79969 : . I just do not appreciate it when hucksters try and manipulate what I write.
96 Atmx2000 : At the current point in time. Historically speaking, Boeing has had more profits from its commercial business in most years in the last few decades.
97 Post contains images NAV20 : Thanks Kangar - I think I understand better now why so many a.netters in Europe get 'uptight' about press criticism of Airbus. It looks as if Airbus
98 Abba : ????? Please explain why you believe that there is a contradiction in saying "that we find that the technology is not good enough yet" and "we are no
99 Joni : It is a cash handout in the sense that Boeing is given money it doesn't have to pay back, in fact USD 6B of money which is a huge sum - hence EADS ha
100 Leelaw : Regarding the alleged subsidies to Boeing from U.S. Governmental entities in the form of favorable tax treatment, aren't these non-cash transactions/
101 Shenzhen : Cash handout equals someone receiving cash (like Airbus). If Boeing are receiving cash, then per US law it must show up on their books, regardless if
102 Kangar : NAV20, that's a bit naughty, the issue was not with the journalist putting the two facts into the same story, it's his attempt to make the connection
103 AerospaceFan : Yes, but publicly? And in such a half-assed, easy-to-misinterpret way? We're not talking about a technical paper presented in dispassionate terms by
104 Post contains links and images Halibut : Abba, I really wish you'd stop assuming things that are just not true & make reference as if I am a dumb " RedNeck " , that belongs on the Jerry Spri
105 N79969 : This is the heart of the matter. Very well said. Airbus is arguing that composite fuselage technology will not be ready until Airbus is ready to star
106 NAV20 : No need for anyone to 'back down', Kangar - we're all entitled to our own views. But I was responding to you saying:- Now you say:- The journalist did
107 Abba : Besides technicalities and accounting practices I would say that the privilege not to have to pay something (tax or whatever) is in practice the same
108 A319XFW : IIRC GLARE is actually used on the rear upper fuselage of the A318, so has been flying for a while... But will have to confirm that is true.
109 Glareskin : As for the discussion about who's leading and who's following. First of all I don't think it is relevant as each company will follow it's own strategy
110 Ikramerica : Hey, I finally agree with you! There is no 100% and you never know. But you can assume that Boeing is very confident. They will have a lot to prove t
111 Areopagus : Most of that "subsidy" is in a reduction in the Washington state B&O tax, which isn't charged by other states. If Boeing had taken 787 production to
112 Glareskin : Thank you! I hope you realize that this is my opinion since the beginning of these three threads... I don't remember exactly, I don't think they try
113 Abba : We have to remember here that the issue was raised by an employee in a safety conference and the very reason we know about it is (so it seems) that t
114 Shenzhen : Safety Conferences normally deal with how to reduce damage to airplanes and reduce injuries. What is normally discussed is human factors that contribu
115 Qutaiba : So Airbus's statement backfired! Good, time for them to start talking about why their products are competitive. but clinging to execuses for a decisio
116 Abba : Or for that matter what the standard should be for procedures for inspections of composites when invisible damage can be feared? Remember that the 78
117 Post contains links and images Halibut : Good greif ! No I haven't ! Why must you make these inaccurate statements ? I have proved muliple links regarding this anti-composite controversy fro
118 Post contains links BoomBoom : Under Airbus' agreements with its sponsor governments, the first repayment threshold kicks in when the airplane reaches 40 percent of projected total
119 Shenzhen : Believe what you will, but after you attend on or two industry conferences, you'll probably change your thinking, but doubtful that you would ever ad
120 Post contains links A319XFW : Speaking of industry conferences, here are the 3 that Airbus could have been at. 49th Polymer matrix composites general session (December) http://www.
121 N79969 : It makes perfect sense if it slows down B787s, results in more certification work for Boeing, all of which they can piggyback on when it is time for
122 Post contains links Abba : Can't. The page will simply not open. I am happy to change my mind if I get new information. I am here on this forum to learn rather than to cheer on
123 Trex8 : yes they did, they also impuned the ability of this startup with no history to produce a plane at all, even though its suppliers had a history as lon
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...
CO "near" Agreement With Boeing On 757-300s posted Thu Oct 16 2003 22:53:59 by STT757
Boeing Agrees With Airbus! posted Thu Mar 22 2001 00:57:37 by Jkelley480
Airbus Reacts To Boeing's Comments On A380 posted Fri Aug 18 2006 02:34:43 by A5XX
Airbus And Boeing On Their Way To Iran? posted Tue Jun 6 2006 17:14:25 by PM
Boeing Signs Deal With Cos. On 787 Jet posted Thu May 26 2005 15:09:23 by NYC777
Boeing In Discussions With MAS On B787 posted Tue Mar 29 2005 00:04:57 by NYC777
Boeing In Talks With QF On B747 ADV posted Mon Jan 31 2005 09:46:58 by 777ER
VS To Go With Boeing Or Airbus? posted Mon May 24 2004 18:53:53 by BCAInfoSys
Turkish Talks To Airbus/Boeing On Planes posted Fri May 21 2004 13:32:06 by Northernlights
Airbus Or Boeing On The Web. posted Wed Sep 10 2003 06:48:34 by Irishpower