Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is The A350 A Casualty Of The A380 Delays?  
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 7073 times:

Now that we know that Airbus will be cash starved because of the A380 delays (compensation, lost business, cost overruns), how does that effect the A350 launch and delivery as well as A350 costs?

A few thoughts:

1) It looking more likely that the industrial launch will be pushed further out to the right, quite possibilily into next year.

2) Because of the cash flow problems that Airbus/EADS will be/is experiencing, the development money for the A350 will strecthed out further thus causing the A350 EIS to be delayed to 2013-14. This will also inevitably increase the per copy cost of the A350. If this hold then some airlines who have bought into it will balked at the increased cost of the A350 unless Airbus tells them that they will honor the pricing in the original contract.

3) Because of the delayed EIS and increase cost, some of the airlines that have firm contracts will either cancel in favor of the 787 or ask for compensation a la A380 delivery delay payments.

4) Those that have not signed on for the A350 (still evaluating vs 787) will more than likely go with the 787 and some who have LoI will not go through with it and perhaps buy the 787, like QR. Al Baker has stated that they cannot tolerate a delay of more than one year beyond the original EIS (2010). It is currently 2012 will a great possibility of mvoing further to the right. I think Al Baker is probably kicking himself for giving up those early 787 slots for the A350.

Airbus' early A350 decisions are coming home to roost as well as there choice to totally ignore the A300/767/A330 replacement market in favor for the VLA market. Both manufacturers agree that the mid-size WB market is about 3000 units and thus far Boeing has captured 420 of those and closing on 500 fairly quickly. That's 1/6 of the potential market already. The is not an official product being offered by Airbus until it's launched and the current LoIs and firm contracts are up in the air until they decide want to do about the A350 and more importantly when they decide.

Airbus is going to be paying a higher price for it's A350 follies and it could cost them mroe than the A380 fiasco did.


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
75 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7045 times:

Also, it's going to take time to restructure the company, upgrade software and training , while at the same time cutting costs. I think if you try to launch the A350 in the middle of this, it's going to lead to another disaster.

User currently offlineKaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12565 posts, RR: 35
Reply 2, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7034 times:

I don't think Airbus can really afford to delay the A350, as this programme has been delayed enough. Bear in mind also that while the A380 might be the "prestige" product in the 380 line up, that market is relatively small; the 787/350 market is much bigger and for Airbus to upset customers in that market would be far more disastrous.

Of course, the A380 problems don't help - can anyone seriously see EK buying the 350 now? I certainly can't, but they don't want to go on delaying it or they just hand orders to Boeing.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 3, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7028 times:

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
I don't think Airbus can really afford to delay the A350

That maybe unavoidable at this juncture.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
Bear in mind also that while the A380 might be the "prestige" product in the 380 line up, that market is relatively small; the 787/350 market is much bigger and for Airbus to upset customers in that market would be far more disastrous.

Thus Airbus' unwise decision to focus on the VLA and ignore the mid-size WB market. They virtually gave it away to Boeing especially after their enemic attemts to counter the 787.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
EK buying the 350

Oh as of yesterday I think Airbus awarded the 787 to EK.

[Edited 2006-10-04 18:21:04]


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31261 posts, RR: 85
Reply 4, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 7031 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I would not be surprised if the A350 program is delayed 12-24 months due to a mix of factors including defining, researching, and implementing the A388's fixes, the software integration issues, and short-term cashflow constraints.

If it isn't, I will also be surprised, but pleasantly so.


User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6972 times:

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
I don't think Airbus can really afford to delay the A350, as this programme has been delayed enough. Bear in mind also that while the A380 might be the "prestige" product in the 380 line up, that market is relatively small; the 787/350 market is much bigger and for Airbus to upset customers in that market would be far more disastrous.

I agree with you 100%. The only question is whether Airbus can financially afford to not delay it. These 380s are turning into VERY expensive birds, and don't forget they have a 400M on the go too. They *did* want to hire more engineers for the 350. However, there is currently a hiring freeze that is inplace till CUTS take place.



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlineAirFrnt From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2827 posts, RR: 42
Reply 6, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6968 times:

There is a lot of wishful thinking here.

Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):

2) Because of the cash flow problems that Airbus/EADS will be/is experiencing, the development money for the A350 will strecthed out further thus causing the A350 EIS to be delayed to 2013-14. This will also inevitably increase the per copy cost of the A350. If this hold then some airlines who have bought into it will balked at the increased cost of the A350 unless Airbus tells them that they will honor the pricing in the original contract.

I don't think there is any real financial reason for this. Airbus simply can't self fund a new plane at this juncture. That means the A350 is completly at the mercy of two different factors. One is if Airbus can actually get the funding (Airbus is basically a company with a maxed out credit card right now - they have 19 billion dollars in credit to pay back to governments, banks and their investors). The second is if they have the engineers to actually pull it off.

Airbus is openly talking about outsourcing work to Russia and China (Japan being American territory). Germany politicans are openly rebelling. French unions will strike before it ever happens. The chance of Airbus getting launch aid if the do go forward with job cuts and outsourcing is not strong.

Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):
4) Those that have not signed on for the A350 (still evaluating vs 787) will more than likely go with the 787 and some who have LoI will not go through with it and perhaps buy the 787, like QR. Al Baker has stated that they cannot tolerate a delay of more than one year beyond the original EIS (2010). It is currently 2012 will a great possibility of mvoing further to the right. I think Al Baker is probably kicking himself for giving up those early 787 slots for the A350.

I really don't think that will matter. QR probably is unhappy with the general state of things, but QR might have burned too many bridges at Boeing (and vice versus).

If Airbus makes a competitive plane, people will buy it. Period.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 7, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6946 times:

Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 5):



Quoting Osiris30 (Reply 5):
The only question is whether Airbus can financially afford to not delay it.

The die may have already been cast. In order to avoid a huge loss on the A380 project, Airbus may have to put off the A350 until the A380 has been stabilized and production issues are behind them. They cannot afford to put resources on both the A380 and the A350. They are now asking themselves, "Well which program has high priority?" We all know that it is the A380.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 8, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6933 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 6):
If Airbus makes a competitive plane, people will buy it. Period.

The problem is no one at Airbus know when they can sell it and how much it's going to cost or even they can start to sell it. All this uncertainty (caused by the A380) will delay the A350 and make it more expensive vs the 787 and probably the 777. At that point airlines would have to evaluate if it is worth it.

Mind you this does not factor in Boeing reaction to the A350 to keep the 777/787/Y3 competitive to what ever Airbus puts out.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1712 posts, RR: 2
Reply 9, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6933 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):
3) Because of the delayed EIS and increase cost, some of the airlines that have firm contracts will either cancel in favor of the 787 or ask for compensation a la A380 delivery delay payments.

I wasn't aware that Airbus had any firm contracts for the A350XWB?

cheers


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 10, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6891 times:

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 9):
I wasn't aware that Airbus had any firm contracts for the A350XWB?

Not for the XWB but for the previous incarnations of the A350. Those firm orders are still uncertain if they will be converted to the new version of they will be canceled by the airlines who ordered them.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineShenzhen From United States of America, joined Jun 2003, 1712 posts, RR: 2
Reply 11, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6869 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 10):
Not for the XWB but for the previous incarnations of the A350. Those firm orders are still uncertain if they will be converted to the new version of they will be canceled by the airlines who ordered them.

I would think that new contracts would need to be drawn, considering the A350 was basically cancelled, and the XWB hasn't yet been launched.

Cheers

[Edited 2006-10-04 18:57:36]

User currently offlineSteeler83 From United States of America, joined Feb 2006, 9263 posts, RR: 21
Reply 12, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6868 times:

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
Bear in mind also that while the A380 might be the "prestige" product in the 380 line up, that market is relatively small; the 787/350 market is much bigger and for Airbus to upset customers in that market would be far more disastrous.

Good point

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 6):
Quoting NYC777 (Thread starter):
4) Those that have not signed on for the A350 (still evaluating vs 787) will more than likely go with the 787 and some who have LoI will not go through with it and perhaps buy the 787, like QR. Al Baker has stated that they cannot tolerate a delay of more than one year beyond the original EIS (2010). It is currently 2012 will a great possibility of mvoing further to the right. I think Al Baker is probably kicking himself for giving up those early 787 slots for the A350.

I really don't think that will matter. QR probably is unhappy with the general state of things, but QR might have burned too many bridges at Boeing (and vice versus).

And how about US, the launch customer for the A350. Like I said before on another thread, they seem rather content, as I don't think they're in any real hurry to take delivery of the A350 just yet. They are focused on the A330 in the short term for continued PHL-Europe build up. I believe they will take the A350 when they choose to do PHL-NRT/PVG. Still, not happening anytime soon, and it's not because of the A350 delays...

As far as Airbus giving any orders over for the 787, I don't see them doing this, especially regarding US and Boeing. They turned away from Boeing in the mid 90s, I believe... They wanted a better product for their 120-160-seat market, and teh 737NGs would not be available at the time US would need them. Then I heard from someone else that the scandal revolving around the 737 after the crash of US 427 while on final approach to PIT also turned them away from Boeing and the 737... Sooo... the A320 family became the viable option for US...



Do not bring stranger girt into your room. The stranger girt is dangerous, it will hurt your life.
User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 25
Reply 13, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 6 days ago) and read 6851 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 7):
The die may have already been cast. In order to avoid a huge loss on the A380 project, Airbus may have to put off the A350 until the A380 has been stabilized and production issues are behind them. They cannot afford to put resources on both the A380 and the A350. They are now asking themselves, "Well which program has high priority?" We all know that it is the A380.

 checkmark  That's *exactly* what I meant by that statement  Smile



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6820 times:

Quoting AirFrnt (Reply 6):
I really don't think that will matter. QR probably is unhappy with the general state of things, but QR might have burned too many bridges at Boeing (and vice versus).

The fact that they finally concluded the 777 deal indicates the bridges are still intact.

Boeing would love to have an order for the 787 from QR.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 15, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 6821 times:

Quoting Steeler83 (Reply 12):
And how about US, the launch customer for the A350. Like I said before on another thread, they seem rather content, as I don't think they're in any real hurry to take delivery of the A350 just yet. They are focused on the A330 in the short term for continued PHL-Europe build up. I believe they will take the A350 when they choose to do PHL-NRT/PVG. Still, not happening anytime soon, and it's not because of the A350 delays...

As far as Airbus giving any orders over for the 787, I don't see them doing this, especially regarding US and Boeing. They turned away from Boeing in the mid 90s, I believe... They wanted a better product for their 120-160-seat market, and teh 737NGs would not be available at the time US would need them. Then I heard from someone else that the scandal revolving around the 737 after the crash of US 427 while on final approach to PIT also turned them away from Boeing and the 737... Sooo... the A320 family became the viable option for US...

Not all would drop the contracts but ILFC for example has 16 firm and they may drop them if the delivery dates are pushed further out to the right. Airbus has only 100 firm A350s so only a few of those would be dropped but it the LOIs and the current sales compeititions vs the 787 (like at EK and LH) where the 787, I think, would win out.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineCHIFLYGUY From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 141 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6703 times:

Financing the A350 is not an issue. Launch aid will be readily available. There is really nothing the US can do about this. Even with a WTO ruling, what would they propose doing, banning or heavily taxing Airbus imports in retaliation? I don't think that's feasible. There is no way the US will spark an all out trade war over this.

The best route for Airbus/EADS is for the Euro governments to restructure the existing launch aid in order to improve the balance sheet. If they wipe the slate clean on the A380 aid, etc., with an agreement not to provide future launch aid, that should both solve Airbus' problems with giving the US a fig leaf to declare victory.


User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31261 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6680 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Shenzhen (Reply 9):
I wasn't aware that Airbus had any firm contracts for the A350XWB?

As NYC777 noted, as the plane has not been formally offered for sale (pending it's industrial launch which was scheduled for this month but may now slip), nobody can sign a firm contract.

And as you correctly noted, when the plane is offered for sale, new contracts will need to be drafted for the A350XWB. A few customers have noted they find the A350XWB acceptable, but they also noted they expect to receive the same pricing they did for the original model (which I don't see possible).

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 16):
Financing the A350 is not an issue. Launch aid will be readily available. There is really nothing the US can do about this. Even with a WTO ruling, what would they propose doing, banning or heavily taxing Airbus imports in retaliation? I don't think that's feasible. There is no way the US will spark an all out trade war over this.

Perhaps it is the EU who do not wish to spark the "all-out trade war"? The US has already withdrawn from the treaty, I believe, which some believe frees Airbus' hand to ask for all the RLA (or just plain cash handouts) they want/need. Yet the host governments have not done that, nor have they indicated (to my knowledge) they are willing to do that.

While it is true the US filing a petition before the WTO on the issue will probably take years to resolve, if the WTO rules against RLA and/or "offsetting" (what Boeing does), Airbus may be required to repay any RLA/cash handouts in a very short period, returning the cash-flow issues such payments would have been meant to cover and now after Airbus has already committed the capital to projects and cannot recover them without going to the capital markets.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 18, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6668 times:

Quoting CHIFLYGUY (Reply 16):
Launch aid will be readily available.

With the bad aste of the A380 experience in their mouths as well as uncertainty as to where the A350 will be built, the EU is going to be very careful about giving out launch aid unless there is a binding agreement that there are certain production facilitieis located in country X and others locateed in country Y. Remember RLA is essentially to ensure that Airbus remains a Public Works Project funded by the EU taxpayers. They will have a say as to where the A350 will be built. This really flies counter to what EADS and Arbus are trying to do to reduce their overhead.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):
they expect to receive the same pricing they did for the original model (which I don't see possible).

The other issue is when will it be delivered which I argue is farther out to 2014.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6629 times:

Airbus is now really in a tough spot right now.

If Boeing went all out for the jugular and announced it was seeking input on the anticipated 737 replacement, the entire product line of Airbus would be exposed.



One Nation Under God
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31261 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6615 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 19):
If Boeing went all out for the jugular and announced it was seeking input on the anticipated 737 replacement, the entire product line of Airbus would be exposed.

Unfortunately (for Boeing) / fortunately (for Airbus), that decision seems to be driven more by the engine manufacturers then the airframe ones. So even if Boeing had the Y1/737RS airframe ready to go, they probably would not launch it until the new engines were ready.


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 21, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 6615 times:

Quoting DAYflyer (Reply 19):
If Boeing went all out for the jugular and announced it was seeking input on the anticipated 737 replacement, the entire product line of Airbus would be exposed.

IMO it already is because of the A380.

Poor cashflow due to A380, A350, A400M, A320E and the BAe buyout. Not to mention they have a huge debt load to contend with including RLA. Now try to do the A320 replacement is going to be next to impossible. And remember, Boeing is planning to launch the 737RS in 2006. That's only two years away!!!!



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offline787engineer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 15
Reply 22, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6582 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 3):

Thus Airbus' unwise decision to focus on the VLA and ignore the mid-size WB market. They virtually gave it away to Boeing especially after their enemic attemts to counter the 787.

At the time the A330 was competing quite well against the 767. When they launched the A380 the 787 was still 4-5 years away.

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 2):
Bear in mind also that while the A380 might be the "prestige" product in the 380 line up, that market is relatively small; the 787/350 market is much bigger and for Airbus to upset customers in that market would be far more disastrous.

Upset customers in that market? You make it sound like there are VLA customers and mid-size WB customers. In most cases they are the same customers and they are already upset.

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 1):
Also, it's going to take time to restructure the company, upgrade software and training , while at the same time cutting costs. I think if you try to launch the A350 in the middle of this, it's going to lead to another disaster.

I don't see why it would lead to another disaster. Upgrading software, training, and restructuring the company. . . BCA did a lot of the same around the launch of the 787. Airbus should be able to do all this as well as cut costs while building the A350.


User currently offlineEchster From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 399 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6570 times:

Let me play devil's advocate and say maybe this is a good thing for Airbus. It will force them to slow down a little and offer a good product that can compete with the B787. This is versus the initial A350 that was widely criticized by most in the aviation industry, including those who do the buying.

User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5796 posts, RR: 47
Reply 24, posted (8 years 1 month 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 6570 times:

Quoting 787engineer (Reply 22):
Airbus should be able to do all this as well as cut costs while building the A350.

Should and could, I think are two different things here. There are a miriad of political and economic considerations that could prevent EADS from making a successful transition to an efficient corporate entity. We already see German politicos lining up their ducks ready to shot at EADS if the A380 work is taken away. It's not going to be easy for EADS. The other problem is corporate culture that is ingrained in EADS/Airbus. It's like the NASA culture prior to the Columbia disaster.



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
25 NYC777 : That could be a problem. If they slow down the A350 then that plane won't start service till 2014. That give the 787 a 6 year headstart. Assuming Boe
26 BoomBoom : So are you saying BCA pre 787 launch was as screwed up as EADS is today? Did they have the same convoluted management structure? Did they have the sa
27 N328KF : I think that BCA's problem at that time was with the sales organization, as well as perhaps Condit. Prior to that, they had production issues, but ev
28 BoomBoom : I thought it was that BCA embarked on a cost cutting program that included new assembly methods. But they tried to ramp up production too fast.
29 Post contains images 787engineer : Couldn't agree more No that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that as far as upgrading/training engineers from CATIA v4 to CATIA v5, restruct
30 Post contains images Leskova : While it gives me shivers down my spine, this thread might just have a bit more truth to it than some of might have hoped: tomorrow's Financial Times
31 Rheinbote : Way off on all accounts. The first statement is illogic: How do you avoid losses on program A by doing or not doing program B? The second statement i
32 NYC777 : The A320 is fine on it's own. It's generating positive cashflow on it own, has no production problems (in fact they're increasing production), and ha
33 NYC777 : That is a very scary prostect if you're Airbus. In essence you're ceding almost an entire market to Boeing. More scarier...want does that say about A
34 Leskova : That's a very mild way of putting it! Might be that he's trying to scare politicians away from trying to influence the expected restructuring - but p
35 Post contains links BoomBoom : No need to get snippy about it. Airbus' management structure has been discussed at length on these forums. This is what Christian Streiff said yester
36 Post contains images USAF336TFS : No, but not that far away. Nope, just one, the CEO, Phil Condit. They were doing the political meddling not the other way around, which, as a shareho
37 TeamAmerica : A350 doesn't compete against B788, it targets B789 (and falls short IMHO), B772 (which it beats pretty handily, but B78A likely will spoil that party
38 Stitch : Airbus, in my opinion, cannot afford to not launch the A350XWB, but I do not believe they have to launch it right now - especially if they are concer
39 Post contains links N1786b : In German: http://www.ftd.de/unternehmen/industrie/119044.html - n1786b
40 Leskova : N1786b... thanks for the link! Ouch... translated: Head of Airbus Christian Streff told Financial Times on Wednesday that the company might need more
41 Post contains links Lumberton : I agree it offers a rare opportunity to restructure, but as I noted on another thread, I don't think the political will is there to accomplish this.
42 NYC777 : Wow, this is something Boeing never has to deal with. Thank god for the fee market economy!!
43 AirFrnt : They have had to deal with it (there was a lot of pressure to build the 747 in california for political reasons). However, since the US government do
44 NYC777 : That's exactly why...Boeing and other companies can, for the most part, resist political interference in their business.
45 Post contains images Osiris30 : If he was he failed.. see my other thread They'd be going head to head with Y3 then, not the 777. If Y3 is anything like 767->787 look out.
46 RayChuang : I think the A350XWB is less of a risk because unlike the Boeing 787, the A350XWB isn't trying to push the limit of aircraft structural technology lik
47 UA772IAD : The 350 will be delayed, I'm sure. The A380 has caused Airbus's future developments to suffer dramatically (hence the first, failed A350). Based on ho
48 Osiris30 : With due respect Ray, it's unlikely to be competive in terms of operating margins either then. Boeing's composite push is a gamble. But when Boeing g
49 Post contains images ER757 : Yep - I would agree with that statement! I wonder if Beoing is talking to their suppliers and deciding whether a 2nd 787 line is feasible and sustain
50 Osiris30 : Stop stealing my ideas damn it !?! LOL (trace back this post)http://www.airliners.net/discussions/general_aviation/read.main/3023825/?searchid=302382
51 Post contains links Osiris30 : I really just can't believe this.. I can't believe this at all.... Airbus May Stop Work on Its A350 Plane, FT Deutschland Says http://www.bloomberg.co
52 Post contains images Astuteman : I can understand them stopping the development for a period, but scrapping it? Watch this space......... Regards
53 N1786b : An interesting thing has happened in the (French) press lately in articles covering the A380 fiasco. All the quotes (in the French press at least) abo
54 N328KF : I would guess that they have decided that they have missed the boat on the midsized widebody competition and that they should just prepare themselves
55 A520 : What about giving priority to 320E and 330E (upgrades need less engineering force) in the next two years in parallel with accomplishment of the 380 an
56 Post contains images Astuteman : Let's not put the cart in front of the horse just yet The quote is :- "The company would be in danger if it experienced problems with the A350 compar
57 NYC777 : I don't think they would cancel it but they will slow it down significantly in order to realize some cost savings that they desperately need. I think
58 USAF336TFS : My good friend Astuteman, I agree with you, but it sounds very much like Airbus management is the among those questioning the location of the cart: F
59 JAL : I think that the problems with the A380 program is going to have an impact on the A350 and other projects at Airbus.
60 Katekebo : The A350 WILL be delayed, there is very little doubt to it, for two reasons: - First Airbus must get their finances under control. I don't think they
61 Post contains images Astuteman : They definitely need to know where it is before they proceed Because Quite simply, in my view, in the longer term, you're right! Regards PS. It's alw
62 TeamAmerica : Absolutely correct on both counts. The mid-market is where the money is, and Airbus has squandered their resources on the A380. At best, a successful
63 Jdevora : I don't think that it was a "one or the other" problem, when they launched the A380 their mid-size WB offer was very solid. I think that their proble
64 Joni : Well let's sort this out: 1) Airbus _will_ deliver the A380 and it will (According to SQ at least) be technically a very good product. It will just d
65 USAF336TFS : You're both right. The danger and the market reality is that Boeing will have much more then a 50% in the not to distant future. If I were an Airbus
66 N328KF : Dominating? Perhaps by deliveries, but not by sales. I don't understand why you even addressed this one. All you did was back up his point.
67 N844AA : With all due respect, isn't it a bit early to tell? I'm aware of the comments on which you're basing your statement, but it seems to be there would b
68 Jdevora : I don't really know, but I would like to point out two facts 1.- Airbus is delivering right now (and for the next 4 years) a record number of planes,
69 NYC777 : Yeah money that has to put towards the cost overruns on the A380, pay out cpompensation to A380 customers, and money to be paid to BAe. Plus any mone
70 RIX : - as this was said in reply to "Airbus did not deliver", I totally agree. As disastrous as "will deliver late" is, "did not deliver" would be much wo
71 Katekebo : GM is still the largest car manufacturer in the world (both in terms of cars produced and $$$ sales). This doesn't mean that they are not at the brin
72 N328KF : Let's not forget that the A400M is on a fixed-cost basis (for launch customers.) This means that they have been told "this is what we're giving you f
73 Post contains images ER757 : I'd like to think it's the former, but in my case it's more likely the latter
74 Post contains images Osiris30 : Not according to Airbus's CEO recently. He (and several analysts) have claimed that the 400M is breakeven or very very close to right now. Additional
75 ER757 : I'd have to say that's an overly optimistic figure. While the market is indeed unknown, the main reason 1000 A380's in the next 20 years is unlikely
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...
Rumor Of New A380 Delays? posted Fri Aug 25 2006 15:47:23 by RedFlyer
What's Wrong With The A380 Delays? posted Wed Oct 18 2006 10:19:03 by MBJ2000
Qantas, Airbus A380 Delays & The Boeing 747-8i posted Wed Aug 9 2006 21:09:47 by Keesje
Will The New A350 Mean The A340 Is Dead? posted Mon May 8 2006 20:53:16 by BoeingBus
Is The A350 Just An A330 With A New Name? posted Fri Mar 10 2006 06:47:59 by Sonic67
Is Bangkok Airways Going For The A350? posted Fri Dec 30 2005 16:40:57 by Beaucaire
What Is This Next To The A380? posted Sun Oct 23 2005 21:24:21 by Frontiercpt
Is NRT Ready For The A380? posted Sun Apr 24 2005 13:21:40 by Leelaw
What Is Happening With The A350? posted Sun Mar 20 2005 14:03:46 by Art
Qantas And The A380 Delays. posted Sun Feb 20 2005 22:58:42 by Qantas077