777fan From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2402 posts, RR: 3 Posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 10476 times:
Interesting article that points out Airbus' efforts to spruce up the A350 design in the wake of the 787's early appeal. No doubt, some will dismiss this as an A vs B thing but, IMO, the last sentence sums it all up; we shall see...
HAJFlyer From Switzerland, joined Sep 2005, 1466 posts, RR: 10 Reply 2, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 10476 times:
It actually seems reasonably fact based and fair to me.
If Airbus had not bet on the thriving mega-hub to mega-hub business with the A380, they would not be facing the issues of a not totally convincing B787 competitor and severely stretched engineering resources.
Gigneil From United States of America, joined Nov 2002, 16215 posts, RR: 88 Reply 3, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 10476 times:
You're not interpreting the article at all as it was intended.
The article states the existing proposed A350 has problems. It says little about the as-yet-unproposed redesigned.
AirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2775 posts, RR: 43 Reply 4, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10385 times:
Quoting Solnabo (Reply 1): What to expect from a Chicago based newspaper! HQ of Boeing are in Chic too?
Shoot the messenger much? This article doesn't have much on the 360/370 redesign, but has a few interesting quotes.
Quote:
"This development was extremely unusual," Aboulafia said. "Usually, planes are launched with careful consultation with customers and on the basis on what the market needs, rather than on how much you can afford."
Quote:
But in a warning to Airbus, Merrill Lynch analyst Charles Armitage said to investors recently, "We do not believe that [being second] is a bad thing, so long as the product is better."
Airbus has to match Boeing here on airplane size (ie, making it bigger to get more seats for a similar CASM isn't going to cut it) and technology. I think they will be able to. I don't see them lapping Boeing technology or logistics wise anytime soon.
Ironically, I think the main hold up on Boeing deciding to increase 787 production rate is what Airbus is doing right now. If Boeing announces after the new 350 is introduced to increase production rate you can read it as they are feeling pretty secure the 350 won't be competitive. If they keep is the same or slightly increase it, they will be worried.
If they do it before Airbus announces, they will be trying to kill the new 350 before it leaves the drawing board.
Csturdiv From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 1351 posts, RR: 3 Reply 6, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10262 times:
Quoting Tancrede (Reply 5): Chicago Tribune is American, Boeing is American. That's tell all. Please next time, find your sources from a more neutral "messenger".
So? About a month ago or so the Chicago Tribune ran a series of articles that blasted Sears and the state of their business. Not only is Sears an American business, but it is a Chicagoland business as well. As much as I do not like the Tribune, they are not a cheerleader as you make them out to be.
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26697 posts, RR: 83 Reply 7, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10262 times:
Quoting Tancrede (Reply 5): Chicago Tribune is American, Boeing is American. That's tell all. Please next time, find your sources from a more neutral "messenger".
Bollocks.
Would you be happier if the article was from a TLS-based newspaper? Or do you believe that a TLS-based newspaper would never print anything that didn't highlight Airbus in a positive light? Or do you expect a TLS-based newspaper to never print anything that didn't highlight Airbus in a positive light?
Sure, there is some hyperbole is this article, just as I am sure this is in articles published by EU papers that talk about Boeing and it's programs. But to just dismiss an entire article outright based on the country of publication is about as...silly...as dismissing an entire post by someone based on the flag by their name.
ContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1436 posts, RR: 50 Reply 8, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10262 times:
Quoting Tancrede (Reply 5): Chicago Tribune is American, Boeing is American. That's tell all. Please next time, find your sources from a more neutral "messenger".
Which sources, exactly, do YOU deem acceptable for this type of information? I think it's only fair that you tell us, since apparently this article never got to the "critical thinking" stage for you, preempted by the nationalities of its subject and the source.
[Edited 2006-05-29 23:20:58]
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21027 posts, RR: 60 Reply 9, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10241 times:
We must also dismiss all articles about Airbus if they are in Le Monde, the FT, in any German paper or on German TV, or from Reuters, among others...
Whatever...
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
SEAPlane10 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 10, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 10135 times:
Quoting Tancrede (Reply 5): Chicago Tribune is American, Boeing is American. That's tell all. Please next time, find your sources from a more neutral "messenger".
Leskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 72 Reply 11, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 10103 times:
Folks - before you go calling the report anti-Airbus based on the topic of this thread, why don't you actually read the article... because as soon as you do, you'll realize that Gigneil has pretty much hit the bullseye:
Quoting Gigneil (Reply 3): You're not interpreting the article at all as it was intended.
The article states the existing proposed A350 has problems. It says little about the as-yet-unproposed redesigned.
The article is about the A350 versions up to the currently know version - it's certainly not about any problems on the currently ongoing redesign (of the redesign of the redesign...).
As for the article - there's really not much to add to it; we all know that the A350 as it is right now has drawn quite a bit of flak... so negative press is not something that should really be much of a surprise.
ContnlEliteCMH From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1436 posts, RR: 50 Reply 12, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 10050 times:
Quoting Leskova (Reply 11): As for the article - there's really not much to add to it; we all know that the A350 as it is right now has drawn quite a bit of flak... so negative press is not something that should really be much of a surprise.
Right, so it's largely accurate insofar as we in this forum can determine. It's also important to realize that the average person in Chicago, Toulouse, or anywhere else doesn't follow aviation. For those readers with a cursory interest, this story is the news they get on this issue, which means it's not really propaganda, regardless of the country from which it originates.
Christianity. Islam. Hinduism. Anthropogenic Global Warming. All are matters of faith!
Airwave From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1117 posts, RR: 3 Reply 13, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 10050 times:
This article doesn't seem to say anything new at all regarding the A350--new design or *new* new design. I'm wondering how long it'll take Airbus to sort this whole thing out or if, like was mentioned earlier, we'll here something at Farnborough. I almost think that at this stage a mercy killing of the program would be in order.
Quoting Tancrede (Reply 5): Chicago Tribune is American, Boeing is American. That's tell all. Please next time, find your sources from a more neutral "messenger".
Wow. Just...wow.
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 9): We must also dismiss all articles about Airbus if they are in Le Monde, the FT, in any German paper or on German TV, or from Reuters, among others...
Whatever...
Airwave
When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
SEAPlane10 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 14, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 10019 times:
Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 9): We must also dismiss all articles about Airbus if they are in Le Monde, the FT, in any German paper or on German TV, or from Reuters, among others...
Using Tancrede's logic:
Frow where would a newspaper have to originate to be "qualified" to write about aviation.......??
SEAPlane10 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 9884 times:
Quoting CWFan (Reply 15): I guess Tancrede's logic dictates that Asian newspapers are the only trusted sources for aviation news.
It almost sounds a bit scholarly......Tancredian Logic...
Glareskin From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1284 posts, RR: 1 Reply 18, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 9847 times:
First of all, I agree with most parts of the article. However:
this has all been mentioned over and over on this forum, what's the added value of this article?
how serious is an article that describes composites as plastic
the article emphasizes the sales success of the 787 vs the A350 without adding the later introduction of the latter (in this part of the article)
it's the same experts comments (Aboulafia or Randy) over and over
I realize I will get flamed because of my summary
I do realize that the 787 is the better concept for the moment. And despite the 350 aircraft being sold (and the success will increase in the coming year) it is still the beginning of the history of aircraft sales from this new generation. Airbus will have to start from the underdog position as they did in most of the other aircraft. But let's take a look at the last sentence of the article:
Quote: "We do not believe that [being second] is a bad thing, so long as the product is better."
. So the target has been set by Boeing. Airbus has to develop and market a better product. And why wouldn't they? They arguably managed to do so with the A300/A310, the A320, the A330/A340 and the A380. OK, go on. Hit me!
There's still a long way to go before all the alliances deserve a star...
SEAPlane10 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 86 posts, RR: 0 Reply 19, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 9802 times:
Quoting Hb88 (Reply 17): So the target has been set by Boeing. Airbus has to develop and market a better product. And why wouldn't they? They arguably managed to do so with the A300/A310, the A320, the A330/A340 and the A380. OK, go on. Hit me!
The only issue in this case is the length of time it took Airbus to "surpass" Boeing in the aircraft categories....the A320 came out almost 20 years after the 737 ( and not agreeing that it is "better" than the 737NG--only the earlier models), the A330 about 15 years after the 767, and the A340 has never surpassed the 777...quite the contrary....and the A380...the EIS is over 36 years after the EIS of the original 747!!--it would be kind of like Apple's gloating that the Ipod is superior to the original Sony Walkman....
Spartanmjf From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 463 posts, RR: 0 Reply 20, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 9756 times:
Quoting Tancrede (Reply 5): Chicago Tribune is American, Boeing is American. That's tell all. Please next time, find your sources from a more neutral "messenger".
Perhaps, then, the "Toulouse Times?" The Tribune is a respected newspaper with strong business reporting capabilities.
Art From Lebanon, joined Feb 2005, 2937 posts, RR: 0 Reply 21, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 9274 times:
Quoting Tancrede (Reply 5): Chicago Tribune is American, Boeing is American. That's tell all. Please next time, find your sources from a more neutral "messenger".
You don't seem to be complaining about what is said in the article, just that the Chicago Tribune ran a story on a troubled Airbus project.
The article seems unpartisan to me. I would like to read something as unpartisan from the Toulouse press.
Wjcandee From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 4553 posts, RR: 17 Reply 22, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 9127 times:
Interesting how some folks think that this is an A-bashing article. Did you read it? It says that Airbus's aircraft, as the second one to market, may be the better, and hence more-successful, aircraft, just as the 777 did well being the last to market. Which aircraft sells more airframes is entirely up in the air.
Boeing has a 3-5-year lead, but its order book for the first 3 years is full, so the real question is how competitive its offering will be in the years after that where both manufacturers presumably will be producing aircraft and looking to fill order books. The market for aircraft in the world today is such that both manufacturers should be able to sell a bunch of aircraft, provided that one doesn't have glaring shortcomings as compared to the other, which *customers* (not I) feel that the A350 presently has, but which Airbus should be more than able to fix, if they're willing to borrow and spend the money. Unless there is some major engineering disaster that results in one of these things cracking in half in flight, they're both gonna sell airframes, and Airbus's will be the newer one. Unlike days of old, where you knew a lot less about the airframe's capabilities until it was already in service, nobody is really likely to choose the 787 four years from now because it is the "proven" design, although they may order more of them because they already have some and like them. Otherwise, it's a food fight. If -- as I expect that they will now be forced to do -- Airbus comes out with a product that meets the 787's performance level, it will sell. Period. The only thing that could dampen the demand for the A350 would be a collapse of the world economy in general or air travel generally (say as the result of terrorism if the Western world doesn't continue to push back against it), combined with a drop in oil prices. It's happened a couple of times in my lifetime, and it can happen again. But that's general market risk, as opposed to the in-my-view-minimal risk that Airbus doesn't have the ability to field a comparable aircraft. Its customers -- as we see today -- plainly won't let it.
I thought that this was a balanced article that makes a variety of positive and flattering assumptions about Airbus's capabilities. It also pulls no punches in stating that -- as the market has made clear -- a mere update of the A330 will not cut it in today's fuel-price-obsessed marketplace. If oil drops back $20 a barrel, efficiency will be nice but not as necessary.
JayinKitsap From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 765 posts, RR: 1 Reply 24, posted (6 years 11 months 4 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 8871 times:
The key point is that Airbus needs to have an equal or better offering as compared to the 787. Having this offering in its larger variants to also be better than the 773ER would be a nice bonus, and actually easier to achieve.
By going to a larger diameter as is being speculated it more likely targets the 280-370 passenger point in the market, which for the long term strategy is probably right for Airbus to position. However, by going up in size it is leaving a huge gap in size with only the A330 competing against the B783 & B788 for all of the A300, A310, B757, B767 replacements. Isn't there like some 3,000 of these currently flying. With size migration either down to NB's or up to the 777 size that would still be like 1,500 to 1,800 planes needing to be replaced in that category within 20 years. That is over 75 per year average.
Although I am more in the B camp, I sincerely hope that Airbus introduces a hit that can take half the market in its targeted size.
Regards
-Jay
25 SEAPlane10: I don't....I hope Boeing dominates the market!
26 777fan: Hence my disclaimer "let's wait and see"!!! 777fan I think two factors that has been overlooked is price and fleet assimilation. Assuming the modifie
28 WorldXplorer: Popular forum hearsay. Haven't you heard, if it's repeated enough on a.net, it becomes fact! WorldXplorer
29 SEAPlane10: Did you mean CO will lean to the 787?
30 Halibut: I could have worded it differently so it could heve been better understood what I was attempting to say . Airbus , I would assume , is current decidi
31 777fan: Oops! Yup, I meant CO would want the 787! Too much sun at the beach today! Thanks for the correction (vice a full out flaming)! 777fan
32 SEAPlane10: No problem. Keep up the good articles!
33 Baron95: I don't think you need to wait to see what Airbus announces at Farnborough to comment on the A350 predicament for A. A few things are almost a given:
34 SEAPlane10: One other aspect that is not being taken into consideration is that Boeing is probably not exactly being static about the concept of continual improv
35 Wjcandee: Well, maybe. But Warren Buffett thinks that there's a speculative bubble in the market, as supply and stores are just where they were when oil was un
36 SEAPlane10: It seems though that the days of cheaply extracted oil are numbered. The trend now seems to be shifting to extract in places like Alberta, where the
37 Manni: You've just made this argument invalid... If we skip articles quoting or expressing the views of Aboulafia and Boeing about Airbus, we'll have plenty
38 777fan: Unfortunately, I think Mr. Buffett needs to reconsider. Terrorist attacks on pipelines, refineries, supply lines, etc. weren't as big of a concern wh
39 SEAPlane10: Originate in this case refers to the country of origin. Tancrede implied that the article had an inherent bias against Airbus because the Chicago Tri
40 Wjcandee: But that's the problem with the entire system being dependent on a system of futures rather than present events. The fact is that we've paid exhorbit
41 Scbriml: There have been several reports (including I think FI) that have stated that Airbus will decide on the A350 redesign by the end of June. That would m
42 Manni: Not quiet. Airbus passed them again with the A346 and A345, not that it lastet long, but neither might the 777-300ER and 772LR.
43 SEAPlane10: Oh man....we could go around in circles forever on surpassing....it's like a dog chasing its tail........
44 Ikramerica: And only more learned a.netters have come to the conclusion that the 350 will surpass the 787 despite using at best the same technology, same physics
45 Glideslope: What is that old saying? "Don't place all your eggs in one basket."
46 SparkingWave: Man oh man... I'm so worried about Airbus! If the A350 is 4 years late with a new redesign, then it will have to be much better than the B787 in order
47 DeltaDC9: Yes, the Trib is always so forgiving of United Airlines and the Bears too, that paper is just a Chicagoland lovefest circlejerk!!!! See above. I dont
48 Danny: "The proposed Airbus A350 sports new engines, a new cockpit, a new tail and new wings made out of plastic--all designed to match the rival Boeing 787
49 DAYflyer: Yeah, like something from Paris or London would be "unbiased" The last sentance does say it all: It ok to be second to market, as long as your produc
50 Rheinbote: Does that mean that Airbus and Boeing will merge and Airbus will finally take over?
51 SparkingWave: If Airbus is going to take over, let it be done fair and square - by them making superior products that outsell their competitors by a large margin,
52 Tancrede: I must admit that I was rather surprise by the strong reaction coming from my small sentence. I did do it on purpose, and must acknowledge that it was
53 Glideslope: You are a wise man indeed. Except it will be Boeing/BAE saving Airbus.
54 Dougloid: The Trib isn't saying anything that anyone else isn't saying. I suggest we killfile the Trib and then killfile every european newspaper as well. That
55 N328KF: This is lunacy. This forum is perfectly willing to accept news from American media outlets such as Bloomberg, Aviation Week & Space Technology, or Th
56 Dougloid: There's a very good parallel that's well worth studying and it does point to the soundness of what Buffett is saying with respect to the bubble that'
57 BoomBoom: Plastic has a rather broad definition: plasïtic Pronunciation (plstk)adj. 1. Any of various organic compounds produced by polymerization, capable of
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 2402 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 785 posts, 
From Switzerland, joined Sep 2005, 1466 posts, 
From Finland, joined May 2006, 240 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 810 posts, 
From Netherlands, joined Jun 2005, 1284 posts, 
From Lebanon, joined Feb 2005, 2937 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
