Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Plays Down SIA 787-9 Selection  
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8615 times:

Airbus and Singapore Airlines say the carrier's decision last week to order up to 40 boeing 787-9s does not close the door to a possible deal for the A350/370.

"...[SIA chief executive] Chew Choon Seng has been saying publicly that what we've got to do to fix the A350," says Airbus chief operating officer, customers, John Leahy. "I had a a conference call with the airline [since the 787 deal was announced] and discussions continue on the A350." SIA says "we don't believe in closing the door on anything," and confirms that it will continue talking with Airbus about the A350. "The door is still open." Leahy says that the possible loss of SIA as a customer, "does not impact our internal discussions on what to do with the A350," despite the airline being one of the key drivers behind studies into the the revamped family...


http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...lays+down+SIA+787-9+selection.html

How does this jive with last week's "stop the chaos...let's stick with what we've got" musings regarding the A350 that were eminating from Mr. Leahy?

http://atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=5384

[Edited 2006-06-19 22:16:31]

77 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3509 posts, RR: 9
Reply 1, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8615 times:

I suppose it's not out of the question considering that SIA operates the B777/A340 and B747/A380 concurrently, but if I were Airbus, I wouldn't get my hopes up on this one.


Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 2, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8594 times:

What would you expect Airbus to say? SQ ordering the 787-9 was a big deal and Airbus knows it....but Airbus will go forward with the A350 program in one form or the other and SQ will certainly continue to study any and all new aircraft developed by Boeing and Airbus. The fact that SQ has ordered the 787 greatly reduces the chances of SQ ever ordering the A350 or whatever Airbus's new midsized jet will be called.

User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 3, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8489 times:

You know... you just might have included the fact that it's not only Airbus playing down the selection in the thread title, but also Singapore Airlines ...

While I agree that the chances for Airbus certainly haven't improved because of SQ's B787 order, a CEO saying "The door is still open." doesn't really sound as if the chances were at 0.



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8471 times:

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 2):
What would you expect Airbus to say?

My point was last week Mr. Leahy seemed to be indicating that Airbus should stick with the "old all-new A350 concept," while these remarks seem to indicate the A350 design needs to be changed? I guess I expect him to be more consistent in his thinking in one week's time.


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8439 times:

Quoting Leskova (Reply 3):
You know... you just might have included the fact that it's not only Airbus playing down the selection in the thread title, but also Singapore Airlines ...

Why, FI didn't think it was necessary in its headline: "Manufacturer Plays Down SIA 787-9 Selection?"


User currently offlineScorpio From Belgium, joined Oct 2001, 5052 posts, RR: 44
Reply 6, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8404 times:

Might not be all that far fetched. Remember the 'new' A350 is supposed to include larger versions to compete with the 777. It wouldn't surprise me to see SIA still seriously considering this plane as a replacement for their large 777 fleet. It could put the both of them in their fleet without the two types overlapping.

User currently offlineRichardPrice From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 8293 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
How does this jive with last week's "stop the chaos...let's stick with what we've got"



Quoting Leelaw (Reply 4):
My point was last week Mr. Leahy seemed to be indicating that Airbus should stick with the "old all-new A350 concept,"

I dont think from the article from ATW that you link to that theres any indication that that is what is being said - all I can get from that article is that they would have 30% of the market (which I dont believe) if they stayed with the current design. Essentially I think he is trying to say he believes that even if there is no redesign, their current market share is safe (again, not something I believe) with the current design, not that they should stick with it.

Can you clarify why you came to that conclusion?


User currently offlineEbbUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 8097 times:

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 7):
Can you clarify why you came to that conclusion?

yes Leelaw I would welcome some clarification as to how you reached your assumption, I mean conclusion, too


User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12939 posts, RR: 25
Reply 9, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 7852 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
[SIA chief executive] Chew Choon Seng has been saying publicly that what we've got to do to fix the A350," says Airbus chief operating officer, customers, John Leahy.

Hmm, is Leahy saying the A350 is "broken"?

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
I had a a conference call with the airline [since the 787 deal was announced] and discussions continue on the A350." SIA says "we don't believe in closing the door on anything," and confirms that it will continue talking with Airbus about the A350.

Yawn. What do you expect? It's in Leahy's interest to say he is still talking to SIA (sifting through the ashes of defeat looking for a victory), whereas it's in SIA's interest to keep talking to Airbus (to keep price pressure on Boeing, and to learn as many details about Airbus aircraft its competition may be interested in).

It's fairly clear to me that A370 and B787-10 will be direct competitors, and it's pretty hard for me to see how SQ will find it in their interest to operate A370 and B787-9 at the same time. It's also pretty clear to me that Boeing will be willing to cut prices to make sure that A370 doesn't end up at SQ, whereas one has to wonder if Airbus will be in a position to loose money on anythng, given their financial pressures.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineJAL From Canada, joined Apr 2000, 5093 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days 4 hours ago) and read 7744 times:

Airbus is just refusing to accept the fact that SIA prefers the 787 over what they have to offer!


Work Hard But Play Harder
User currently offlineZoom1018 From Taiwan, joined May 2005, 233 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days ago) and read 7530 times:

It is funny how Airbus always has something to say everytime Boeing wins an order.

User currently offlinePolymerPlane From United States of America, joined May 2006, 991 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days ago) and read 7498 times:

Leahy should just focus all of his energy into selling his widebody aircrafts, instead of trying to comment every time Boeing makes a big sales.

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
I had a a conference call with the airline [since the 787 deal was announced] and discussions continue on the A350

The conference call looks like this:

Leahy : Hello SQ, this is John Leahy from Airbus.
SQ : Hi Mr. Leahy, What's up?
Leahy: Are you still interested in our A350
SQ: Not really we just ordered from Boeing
Leahy: OK thank you
 biggrin 

Cheers,
PP



One day there will be 100% polymer plane
User currently offlineN1786b From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 560 posts, RR: 17
Reply 13, posted (8 years 6 months 5 days ago) and read 7490 times:

Quoting Zoom1018 (Reply 11):
It is funny how Airbus always has something to say everytime Boeing wins an order

Isn't it a funny way for FI to announce the order?

A huge win for Boeing and the 787 coming the day after EADS/Airbus' Black Wednesday and this is the way they decide to announce the order?


 thumbsdown   thumbsdown   thumbsdown 


- n1786b


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10234 posts, RR: 97
Reply 14, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7202 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Revelation (Reply 9):
It's fairly clear to me that A370 and B787-10 will be direct competitors, and it's pretty hard for me to see how SQ will find it in their interest to operate A370 and B787-9 at the same time

Unless the A370/B787-10 overlap is at the bottom of the A370 range.......

Regards


User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7172 times:

Leahy is doing his sales thing again, isn't he?

If there is one thing that Airbus doesn't need much more of these days, it's bluster.

Is Leahy blustering? No one here can say for sure. Nevertheless, Leahy strikes me as a talkative type who could easily sell snow to the indigenous peoples of the Arctic -- and make them like it.

Isn't an excess of salesmanship -- overpromising the schedule of delivery for the A380 -- a possible reason that Airbus is in the mess it's in to begin with?

[Edited 2006-06-20 11:16:39]

User currently offlineSolnabo From Sweden, joined Jan 2008, 859 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7160 times:

Lets wait and see what the future holds, A350/370 could kill the 787-series like 330 vs 767.

I´m not holding my breath, but I´ll keep my  crossfingers 

Micke//SWE  wave 



Airbus SAS - Love them both
User currently offlineAerospaceFan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 7148 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 14):
Unless the A370/B787-10 overlap is at the bottom of the A370 range.......

I think that we'd have to know whether it's technically and financially feasible for Airbus to build such an aircraft using known engine technology and still maintain or exceed the 20% fuel efficiency improvement promised by the Dreamliner. Alternatively, Airbus could contemplate future advances in powerplant technology. (This would seem to be so regardless of whether by "range" you mean the general size of the aircraft, or its fuel capacity.) In any event, it seems to me that the massive redesign of the A350 would be made even more difficult if Airbus decides to leapfrog the Dreamliner's current size, particularly insofar as it may have to wait until engine technology catches up.


User currently offlineLTU932 From Germany, joined Jan 2006, 13864 posts, RR: 50
Reply 18, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 7133 times:

Quoting Leskova (Reply 3):
While I agree that the chances for Airbus certainly haven't improved because of SQ's B787 order, a CEO saying "The door is still open." doesn't really sound as if the chances were at 0.

Maybe so, but I also agree with this:

Quoting Gunsontheroof (Reply 1):
if I were Airbus, I wouldn't get my hopes up on this one.

But on the other hand, let's consider that SQ might want options for their fleet replacement in the mid to longterm. Maybe at a certain point in time, if the A350 does become that A370, or if the 787-9 by some chance doesn't perform as promissed, then just maybe it could become an option. We have to remember that SQ replaces their aircraft at a very young age. Nonetheless, I have a very hard time trying to figure out SQ's intentions. That's just the way I see it. Feel free to correct me.

BTW: are these 787-9s intended for expansion or as replacement for SQ's oldest 772ER/773As?


User currently offlineDutchjet From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 7864 posts, RR: 56
Reply 19, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 7063 times:

Quoting Solnabo (Reply 16):
Lets wait and see what the future holds, A350/370 could kill the 787-series like 330 vs 767.

I´m not holding my breath, but I´ll keep my

Micke//SWE

Its smart not to hold your breath on this one........SQ is now a 787 customer, end of story. Your reference to the 330 and 767 is also a poor one.....look at total 767 sales against total A330 sales and get back to me; did the A332 outsell the 764ER, yes........did the A330 out sell the 767, not by a long shot. I know you are anti-Boeing, but you cannot spin this one into an Airbus success story.

Quoting LTU932 (Reply 18):

But on the other hand, let's consider that SQ might want options for their fleet replacement in the mid to longterm. Maybe at a certain point in time, if the A350 does become that A370, or if the 787-9 by some chance doesn't perform as promissed, then just maybe it could become an option. We have to remember that SQ replaces their aircraft at a very young age. Nonetheless, I have a very hard time trying to figure out SQ's intentions. That's just the way I see it. Feel free to correct me.

BTW: are these 787-9s intended for expansion or as replacement for SQ's oldest 772ER/773As?

Come one, Airbus cheerleaders........accept that SQ went with the 787 and Airbus lost the A350 order. If a pro-Boeing guy were to suggest that BA would trade its A320 fleet in for the 737NG the day after it ordered the A320, the Airbus gang would be outraged.

SQ has a long term commitment to the 777 (with additional 773ERs on order) and now selected the 787 family for its smaller needs......in Boeing fashion, the 787 will deliver, and if SQ wans to replace early build 772s, it will now look to the 787-10 for that mission......thats the was it is. SQ is an effecient carrier, and multiple fleet types are not their style.

My guess is that SQ will use the 787-9s will be used for several purposes: to add new cities out of the SIN hub, allow for daily nonstop service on thinner routes, and expansion due to the superior economics of the 787.


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 20, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 7032 times:

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 7):



Quoting EbbUK (Reply 8):

I made my assessment based on what I perceived to be a change in message from Airbus considering the totality of the circumstances. After ISTAT at Orlando in March, where Mr. Udvar-Hazy of ILFC "dropped the dime" on the "old all-new A350," the message from Airbus quickly evolved into "we are listening to our customers and considering making changes." Until his remarks last week, Mr. Leahy had been silent on this matter since ISTAT. In fact, there has been much media speculation that Mr. Udvar-Hazy was actually acting on behalf of Mr. Leahy and likeminded people at Airbus. IMO, when Mr. Leahy broke his silence by saying "some outspoken customers of ours have created some confusion and the press has amplified that confusion...," he seemed to be discounting the criticisms of the "outspoken customers," and suggesting that the "old all-new A350" remained a viable concept. Certainly, I don't suffer under the burden of infallibility.  Smile Just my  twocents .


User currently offlineEbbUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 7001 times:

Quoting PolymerPlane (Reply 12):
Leahy : Hello SQ, this is John Leahy from Airbus.
SQ : Hi Mr. Leahy, What's up?
Leahy: Are you still interested in our A350
SQ: Not really we just ordered from Boeing
Leahy: OK thank you
  

Cheers,
PP

Going on your theory, "not really" is not a "no". There's a window there. So I would downgrade your grin to a smirk on that one

Quoting AerospaceFan (Reply 15):
Isn't an excess of salesmanship -- overpromising the schedule of delivery for the A380 -- a possible reason that Airbus is in the mess it's in to begin with?

I suggested something along the same lines in another thread. Though how likely is it that Leahy would promise the earth when he knows what his engineers have told him? When Airbus have failed to deliver, is it because Leahy's promise (some would say boast) or is it an organisational blunder from tech to sales and management? We may never know

Quoting Dutchjet (Reply 19):
our reference to the 330 and 767 is also a poor one.....look at total 767 sales against total A330 sales and get back to me; did the A332 outsell the 764ER, yes........did the A330 out sell the 767, not by a long shot. I know you are anti-Boeing, but you cannot spin this one into an Airbus success story.

Dutchjet you're up for some mischief this morning aren't you? The statement is correct, the 330 killed off the tardis 767. You are right that the tardis 767 outsold the 330 but that was not the thread of the argument and you know it.


User currently offlineAndesSMF From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 6976 times:

Quoting EbbUK (Reply 21):
Though how likely is it that Leahy would promise the earth when he knows what his engineers have told him? When Airbus have failed to deliver, is it because Leahy's promise (some would say boast) or is it an organisational blunder from tech to sales and management? We may never know

Being involved with engineering for 17 years now, let me tell you why I feel for the Airbus engineers and Airbus. There are many projects that I have done that require me to be almost done before I can give an exact answer to a question. Therefore, I can respond with a good deadline when the project will be done, PROVIDED NO GLITCHES SHOW UP AT THE LAST MINUTE, due to the previously said statement. And there are some glitches, even small problems, that require a total reworking of an area, just to solve the very small problem.

I have also done several projects, nothing out of the ordinary, that literally just got all fucked up, to use the adequate word. Just little by little, or with no reason at all, the project just becomes an absolute nightmare.

So as it stands right now, I couldnt even tell you if Leahy overpromised or if there are real technical and manufacturing issues. But the clients dont care about your problems, all they care about is getting the airplane.


User currently offlineEbbUK From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6881 times:

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 4):
My point was last week Mr. Leahy seemed to be indicating that Airbus should stick with the "old all-new A350 concept," while these remarks seem to indicate the A350 design needs to be changed? I guess I expect him to be more consistent in his thinking in one week's time.

This was your original post which both RichardPrice and I sought clarification.

Below is your response

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 20):
In fact, there has been much media speculation that Mr. Udvar-Hazy was actually acting on behalf of Mr. Leahy and likeminded people at Airbus. IMO, when Mr. Leahy broke his silence by saying "some outspoken customers of ours have created some confusion and the press has amplified that confusion...," he seemed to be discounting the criticisms of the "outspoken customers," and suggesting that the "old all-new A350" remained a viable concept. Certainly, I don't suffer under the burden of infallibility.   Just my   .

Mr Leahy has not ever changed his standpoint as to the viability of the A350 has he? by your admission when the statement came out about listening to customers Leahy was quiet. The next time he spoke about the project he re-affirmed his belief in the original project.

Inconsistency is not an accusation that you can level on Mr Leahy on this matter. Your two cents have minimal value in the criticism that you are leveling against Leahy.


User currently offlineLeelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (8 years 6 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 6758 times:

[quote=EbbUK,reply=23]

The inconsistency is between what Mr. Leahy suggested last week, and what he seems to be suggesting this week. What is viable, the "old all-new A350" as Mr. Leahy suggested last week, or some nascent design iteration which takes in account what Mr. Chew says needs to be fixed? Why would Mr. Chew keep the "door open" on something that needs to be fixed, if Mr. Leahy isn't willing to fix it?


25 Post contains links Trex8 : why? its a follow on to this from 6/14 http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles...latest+blow+to+Airbus's+A350.html
26 Nudelhirsch : Because according to fellows like you the 350 has not been nailed down yet, which in your eyes is a bad thing... On the good side, it has all room fo
27 Post contains images EbbUK : Nothing incosistent here, He knows, you know,I know both are viable, which has more potential for profit? the re-design. Would Leahy want that? Of co
28 Post contains links Leelaw : When did I say that? IIRC, I've said in more than a few recent threads that I thought Tim Clark's assessment of the situation from last month has a l
29 Post contains images Boeing Nut : Well file this one under - "duh!" Again, with the death to Boeing chant?
30 Post contains links and images Boeing767-300 : I've got to hand it to the Airbus cheerleaders. Even in this dark period of uncertainty and despite the fact Airbus really has no idea of product str
31 N1786b : " target=_blank>http://www.flightglobal.com/Articles....html Funny, I don't remember seeing that one in print. - n1786b
32 DAYflyer : No matter what kind of spin Airbus puts on the face of it, this sums it up raher well I think. Airbus is grasping at whatever straws it can find at t
33 Leelaw : I don't agree that the "old all-new A350" remains viable in the marketplace. The two key money men in the industry (Udvar-Hazy, ILFC & Hubschman, GEC
34 Ikramerica : Here's the thing. A370 might be better than the 773ER. We don't know. SQ hasn't even taken their 773ER yet, having postponed it for the A380 EIS, now
35 EbbUK : I will be the first to cheer! Airbus is too exposed to this carrier. I think the Boeing fans were first to say this and I, as a lover of Airbus, for
36 B777ER : Of course Signapore will say that, they want Boeing to offer competitive prices when they go back for more 787's in the future.
37 EbbUK : They should have kept quiet about the 350/370 then. Own goal for SQ. wah! wah! wah!
38 UALMMFlyer : I agree, but not just for the future but also for the current 20+20. SQ only signed a Letter of Intent, and the price is not final until the purchase
39 Post contains links Leelaw : These potential customers still have to go to financial institutions/lenders to finance their fleets. Mr Udvar-Hazy, among the premier financiers ser
40 EbbUK : Totally agree with you. But that is not to say that there isn't a market out there. ILFC GECAS SALE are not the only players in the marketplace, what
41 LTU932 : And why are you labeling me as an Airbus cheerleader? I was being neutral about this. The points I tried to made were part of a hypothesis. If what I
42 Post contains images Astuteman : Apologies to both - my point was advanced as the only hypothetical reason that SQ might find it logical to order both the 787-9 AND the A370, not as
43 Adria : but is it really good for SQ to have aircraft from only one manufacturer? I would expect that they keep both in their fleet (not counting the A380).
44 AndesSMF : Here is IMHO part of the issue. The A330 is a good plane, the A350 (or anything that improves on the A330) is an even better plane. The problem is th
45 Post contains images Picard : A330 total sales 668 to 2005, from EIS - 39.29 sales per year 767 total sales 966 ro 2005, from EIS - 38.64 sales per year Might not outsell but has
46 Katekebo : I think you are taking Mr. Leahy's word way too seriously. What do you expect to hear from a guy who just a little over two years ago said that airlin
47 PolymerPlane : They did not have a problem for the past decade. I am pretty sure they have pretty high bargaining position to squeeze Boeing to its last juice. Wait
48 Post contains images Ikramerica : You know what? Maybe people were just making an assumption based on your long history of doing so. Have you changed overnight? If so, you need to not
49 Post contains images Picard : What ever happens to the A330 the same for the 767 my friend , think before you post .[Edited 2006-06-21 00:20:08]
50 Zvezda : It's not the average that covers development costs and (hopefully) then turns a profit. It's the total.
51 BoomBoom : What that tells me is the 767 outsold the A330 by 298 copies and it's highly unlikely the A330 will ever be as successful as the 767. You can slice a
52 Ikramerica : I don't know how you got 39 per year for the 330. But it's dumb anyway. The 332 competes with the 767, but the 333 really competes with the 772A and
53 Picard : Well what that tells me is that since the A330 has come into service the 767 has had its butt handed to it. A330 has had the 200 and 300 developed -
54 Dutchjet : 767 vs A330......Boeing has sold 300 more airplanes. The 767 is the better selling aircraft, end of discussion.
55 Picard : Your definition of better is the highest sales total? Does that really make it the better more successful plane? Bit of a simplist view.[Edited 2006-
56 Dutchjet : First, I said better selling plane, not better plane. And, yes, I am simple......I did not study the new math. As far as I know, 996 is more than 668
57 Zoom1018 : For A330 from EIS to 2005 = how many years... use that "years" for 767 from EIS to (that number of years) and it would not be 2005!! From there you c
58 Post contains images Picard : Looks like I used the wrong date for the A330 EIS . Correct date below. Zoom1018 please read correctly. 2005 = year 2005. A330 EIS Year 1994 to Year
59 Dutchjet : Its late, I am tired, if you really think that the A330 has outsold the 767, thats fine with me. Are you an accountant?
60 Post contains images Picard : I never said that are you a lawyer? .
61 Shenzhen : You should probably be comparing the A300/A310 with the 767, as they as closer in size and era. You could compare the 767-4 with the A330-2. Since th
62 BoeingBus : The 767 is a smaller plane than both the A332 and 3... You can only account the A332 and A310 as competitors... so Picard if you care to do the number
63 Post contains images Astuteman : Cheeky t**t
64 Zoom1018 : Thank you for showing this. I might not say it clear... Please check for B767s from 1982 to 1993 (in 11 years)... how many of them were sold? I think
65 EbbUK : Learnt that from the sultans of spin I could have saved you time, you should have just asked me. That's why to level the playing field for airbus, yo
66 Post contains images Boeing767-300 : Seeing as you both (Picard & EbbUK) are both English you will understand in 'Cricket' terms that the 767 at over 900 are 'runs on the board' and 'in
67 EbbUK : yeah but using the figures Picard's given, airbus spanked the tardis 767. true? those figures just don't lie. You do the math, on a year by year aver
68 Trex8 : unless there are KC767s, the 767 line is for all purposes dead. but there may well be a commercial market for new build A332Fs which could see it keep
69 EbbUK : I seem to recall SQ's board stating that they'd given the go-ahead for final negotiations with both manufacturers to take place. So Boeing got 20 789
70 Trex8 : maybe I'm just stupid but why take a plane optimized for flights up to 8000miles to use only on routes less than 4000??? besides being a little small
71 11Bravo : I think you're seriously misinterpreting that, or perhaps you're just indulging in the muckraking that has become the substance of your posts and rep
72 Post contains images Boeing767-300 : You miss the point yet again but then so did Airbus which is exactly why they are in the "Pickle" (pun intended Halibut) that they are in now. They r
73 Picard : The reasons the 767 did reasonable well is because of the low fuel cost environment of the time and it was upgraded to with the ER versions, if Airbu
74 Brendows : I'll sum it up quickly: payload, payload, payload. The 789 can't fly more than 5200nm with a full payload, and SQ is going to use it on routes up to
75 Trex8 : well according to the Boeing website the -9 can carry almsot 60000lbs to 8000nm, which is maybe just under 300 passengers plus bags, are you trying t
76 Post contains links Brendows : No, it can carry about 57-58 tonnes of payload (pax+cargo) up to ~5400nm. With 280 pax, that gives you about 30 tonnes of extra payload capacity (car
77 Trex8 : sorry, no caffeine fix yet! got lbs and kgs mixed up!
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...
SIA Says Airbus To Build The 787-9 For Them posted Wed Nov 8 2006 03:10:54 by Jimyvr
Boeing Takes On Airbus Lying Down posted Fri Mar 3 2006 15:20:12 by TinkerBelle
Airbus Site Down? posted Mon Sep 1 2003 15:05:06 by Motorhussy
Tilton Plays Down Fears Of Liquidation posted Mon Feb 24 2003 03:29:09 by Jcs17
HP Airbus Shut Down On SAN Taxiway. posted Sun Jul 14 2002 05:07:40 by Leftypilot79
Airbus UHCA, Boeing7J7, Boeing 787 Pics. posted Tue Jun 20 2000 21:51:13 by Granite
Boeing Aims To Keep Airbus @ Bay No 787 Delays! posted Fri Oct 20 2006 04:26:05 by Coelacanth
5th KLM Airbus A330 Touched-down In Amsterdam posted Mon Aug 28 2006 16:19:48 by EHAM
Airbus Releases Updated Picture Of SIA's A359XWB posted Sat Aug 5 2006 02:08:44 by Singapore_Air
Should Airbus Compete Directly With The 787-3&8? posted Thu Aug 3 2006 13:34:13 by MotorHussy