Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7121 times:
24 October 2006
Airbus is expected to seek board approval from parent company EADS in early November to move forward with the launch of the revamped A350 XWB programme, but has meanwhile delayed a regular strategy briefing with suppliers about future products.
When it unveiled the A350 XWB at Farnborough in July, Airbus said that it intended to be ready to seek an industrial launch decision for the new programme "in three months." However, according to industry sources , Airbus has told senior planners at various suppliers that the tumult over the A380 delay, the restructuring and changeover in leadership and other senior management has left its original plans in complete disarray.
Flight International understands that major systems and engine suppliers that were originally to travel to Toulouse for Airbus's regular six-month future products strategy meeting around mid-November were told to cancel. "They have no strategic plan at he moment," says one key supplier, which does not want to be identified...
Doesn't it seem odd that a "board" would approve an "industrial launch" without a coherent strategic plan?
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, RR: 10 Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7107 times:
Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter): Doesn't it seem odd that a "board" would approve an "industrial launch" without a coherent strategic plan?
What it probably means is that Airbus needs to know the outcome of the "go/no go" decision before they can plan the conference and there won't be time to do it so that conf is delayed.
I hope that they can get the sums to add up and launch this baby with a few orders.
As as aside when / if the XWB is launched it is going to wreck AB's orders for the year as we're likely to get lots of cancellations of the old A350 and new orders for the XWB but not all so it may have a negative impact on the order sheet (until SQ firm their 20, LF order 50, BA 25, QR 60 and EK 100 )
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11708 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7083 times:
But wasn't the original A-350 Mk I going to enter airline service in 2009? Now with the A-350XWB program, the earliest it can enter service is 2012, or later. How is this going to effect the US order for the A-350 Mk I? As Airbus gave them a loan to help exit bankruptcy, and part of the deal was a US order for the A-350, not the A-350XWB.
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, RR: 10 Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7070 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2): But wasn't the original A-350 Mk I going to enter airline service in 2009? Now with the A-350XWB program, the earliest it can enter service is 2012, or later. How is this going to effect the US order for the A-350 Mk I? As Airbus gave them a loan to help exit bankruptcy, and part of the deal was a US order for the A-350, not the A-350XWB.
I beleive that if they repay the loan they no longer have to stick to the A350 order - but I'd imagine that they will as they will likely get the XWB at a bargin price - a Mercedes at Lada prices it was described by a differant CEO!
Bringiton From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 866 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 7055 times:
Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 1): As as aside when / if the XWB is launched it is going to wreck AB's orders for the year as we're likely to get lots of cancellations of the old A350 and new orders for the XWB but not all so it may have a negative impact on the order sheet (until SQ firm their 20, LF order 50, BA 25, QR 60 and EK 100 )
Which leads to the question regarding what airbus has done to the 100 or so orders that the had ? Are they offering the A330 instead ??
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, RR: 10 Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6982 times:
Quoting Bringiton (Reply 4): Which leads to the question regarding what airbus has done to the 100 or so orders that the had ? Are they offering the A330 instead ??
I think that'll be a point of negotitation between AB and the airlines - some will go for the A330, some the XWB and some will cancel.
Another customer I forgot was ILFC who promised to order some more if they made it wider:
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6854 times:
Quote: THE Government is braced for a confrontation with Airbus today over the aircraft manufacturer’s continued presence in the UK after it emerged that British representatives have not been included in the planning committee for the A350, the next Airbus project.
Evidence that Britain is being sidelined from the planning of the A350 project will raise the temperature at a meeting in London today when Alastair Darling, the Trade and Industry Secretary, will discuss future British government investment in the project with Louis Gallois, the head of Airbus, and Tom Enders, the head of EADS, Airbus’s parent.
Fears are growing that Britain’s weakened position will mean that Airbus’s Broughton plant in North Wales, which makes aircraft wings, may miss out on a share in the $10 billion (£5.3 billion) investment, putting at risk some 13,000 jobs.
The appointment of a British representative to the EADS board may also be in doubt. The Times has learnt that EADS is also looking at US and Commonwealth citizens who would be responsible only nominally for overseeing its UK operations.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
Scouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, RR: 10 Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6807 times:
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6): It appears that there is now great concern in the UK about the extent of Airbus UK's participation in the A350:
Showdown as UK fights for role in Airbus A350
I hope that this is only posturing over how much cash the government will LOAN AB to launch this bird - they can't bin Broughton!
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6759 times:
Here's a quote from Allan McArtor, Chairman of Airbus North America, on the A350. He leaves no doubt this project will be launched soon.
Quote: Q. Is the Mobile engi neering center still assigned to work on the A350? There's been some speculation that Airbus will delay the launch of that airplane.
A. The A350 is one of the projects central to that facility. It has been introduced to our customers, and it will be formally launched in the next several weeks. It's a very important aircraft for us, and we must have our engineering resources in place to make sure it's a success.
He also is confident for the prospects of Airbus expanding in the U.S.
Quote: Q. The new chief execu tive, Louis Gallois, said he's looking to outsource some Air bus work from Europe as a way to cut costs. Could that mean more work in the United States?
A. It will definitely mean more procurement in the United States. It could very well lead to more manufacturing work here, but I can't say what or how much. It's too early to speculate about that.
Q. Is there a business case for shifting more work to America?
A. You can expect to see Airbus more active in what we call the "dollar zone" going forward. One of the factors is the exchange rate. Because the dollar is so weak against the euro, it makes a more compelling case for investing in the U.S.
As it stands, the currency situation puts (our European operations) at a 20 percent disadvantage, and we need to increase our dollar-based activities to get some balance there. It's something we're looking at, and that could be good news for Mobile. Whether that means more engineering or manufacturing work I can't say for sure. It certainly strengthens the case for Mobile, and it could mean additional work in the future. But we have to get things stabilized first.
IMO, this musn't be seen as a "zero sum" situation for EADS workers. New business projects, like the A350 and the KC-30, represent an opportunity to diversify and expand the production base. I hope the EU unions don't paint this a a threatening situation.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
Leelaw From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 6225 times:
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6): It appears that there is now great concern in the UK about the extent of Airbus UK's participation in the A350
IIRC, it took some time to carve up the "spoils" of the "old all-new A350" program, including extracting "tribute" from the U.K. government in the form of a commitment for launch-aid to keep Airbus U.K. in the game, before it was "industrially launched" in October of last year.
Atmx2000 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 4576 posts, RR: 39 Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6177 times:
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 8):
McArtor:
A. You can expect to see Airbus more active in what we call the "dollar zone" going forward. One of the factors is the exchange rate. Because the dollar is so weak against the euro, it makes a more compelling case for investing in the U.S.
As it stands, the currency situation puts (our European operations) at a 20 percent disadvantage, and we need to increase our dollar-based activities to get some balance there.
They are not at a disadvantage. The exchange rate is where it should be on a historical basis. European economies are simply uncompetitive when their currency is not undervalued as it was from 1999-2003.
ConcordeBoy is a twin supremacist!! He supports quadicide!!
Stitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 26697 posts, RR: 83 Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 6151 times:
Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter): Doesn't it seem odd that a "board" would approve an "industrial launch" without a coherent strategic plan?
By launching the plane, even if they don't have any specifics, is a sign to prospective customers that Airbus intends to move forward on the plane. It also helps Airbus start to firm up those LoIs/MoUs as well as begin formal order conversion for those A350MkI customers who wish to continue forward with the A350XWB.
After all, Boeing has yet to firm the 748I and recently changed it's form, even though it launched it months ago.
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6): It appears that there is now great concern in the UK about the extent of Airbus UK's participation in the A350...
Makes sense. Germany is considering taking a direct ownership role to protect their own jobs. Britain may very well have to do the same to ensure Broughton continues to build wings for future Airbus commercial products and continue to have a say in EADS/Airbus decisions.
RedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4175 posts, RR: 30 Reply 13, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5858 times:
Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter): Doesn't it seem odd that a "board" would approve an "industrial launch" without a coherent strategic plan?
They have no choice but to approve an industrial launch. If they don't do it soon then the message that airline clients will get is that Airbus is giving up the widebody market and going to be just a niche player. They have to approve in order to remain viable.
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2): Now with the A-350XWB program, the earliest it can enter service is 2012, or later.
I think it's going to be later. Much later, like 2014. I don't think anyone really believes it will EIS in 2012 as Airbus has stated.
Laxintl From United States of America, joined May 2000, 22028 posts, RR: 51 Reply 14, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 5836 times:
Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 2): How is this going to effect the US order for the A-350 Mk I? As Airbus gave them a loan to help exit bankruptcy, and part of the deal was a US order for the A-350, not the A-350XWB.
Quoting Scouseflyer (Reply 3): I beleive that if they repay the loan they no longer have to stick to the A350 order - but I'd imagine that they will as they will likely get the XWB at a bargin price
At a recent employee exchange Doug Parker mentioned that US Airways is no longer under any obligation to take the A350, however they are in a wait an see mode awaiting Airbus moves and what the final version of the A350 might look like. While delayed, they might end up with a much more capable airplane at a bargain price.
A more immediate fleet decision at US Airways, is a follow on narrow body order to replace the carriers large 737 fleet, with both the Airbus A320 and 737NG series under review according to the Parker.
From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
Glideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1542 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5349 times:
Quoting Stitch (Reply 11): Makes sense. Germany is considering taking a direct ownership role to protect their own jobs. Britain may very well have to do the same to ensure Broughton continues to build wings for future Airbus commercial products and continue to have a say in EADS/Airbus decisions.
.....and the disintegration begins.
"All men can see these tactics whereby I conquer, but what none can see is the strategy out of which victory is evolved"
Ikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21027 posts, RR: 60 Reply 17, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5316 times:
Where is the real money in the market?
If Airbus were a super-regional aircraft maker, by that I mean focusing on short and medium range jets, what is the financial outlook?
Airlines have repeatedly demonstrated that they don't care about commonality between short and longhaul fleets because the pilots don't tend to cross between the two.
If Airbus just stuck to what it does best - A330 and A320 series - why is this a bad thing? Why did they force themselves into the A340 then the A380 markets? I doubt that the A340 or A380 programs will ever make them money on their own. Without the A330 to bolster the A340, it's a loss maker, and the recent versions are all loss makers. All of it took away focus from the A330 and what it could have been. Longer range if desired, A330F launched years ago. A330NG with better engines, etc.
Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
"We are seeking an industrial launch but we have no strategic plans."
Whoever heard of such a thing????
Everyone who lived in the Soviet Union was familiar with the sort of doublespeak we're seeing from Airbus lately. My favorite Pravda headline was:
СССР второй, США предпоследний (USSR second, USA second-to-last). The article was about a track and field competition. Many articles leading up to the event mentioned that only the USSR and USA were competing. It was never again mentioned after the event. I don't ever remember this from Airbus when Jean Pierson was in charge. Is he still alive? Can he be brought out of retirement? Probably some stupid labour law prohibits it.
Lumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 21 Reply 20, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5089 times:
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 18): I don't ever remember this from Airbus when Jean Pierson was in charge. Is he still alive? Can he be brought out of retirement? Probably some stupid labour law prohibits it.
I read recently that he had retired and was fishing in Corsica (or Sardinia). I have no doubt that EADS would like him to come back, but IMO he has nothing left to prove.
"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
N328KF From United States of America, joined May 2004, 6222 posts, RR: 3 Reply 21, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 5063 times:
Quoting Zvezda (Reply 18): I don't ever remember this from Airbus when Jean Pierson was in charge. Is he still alive? Can he be brought out of retirement? Probably some stupid labour law prohibits it.
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 20): I read recently that he had retired and was fishing in Corsica (or Sardinia). I have no doubt that EADS would like him to come back, but IMO he has nothing left to prove.
Maybe DCX could acquire Ford and use it to move Mulally to Airbus.
Just kidding—DCX already has two dogs. No need for them to get wrapped up in a third.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' T.Roosevelt
Charger From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 273 posts, RR: 0 Reply 22, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4763 times:
Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 13): Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
Doesn't it seem odd that a "board" would approve an "industrial launch" without a coherent strategic plan?
Just a question here, so all please keep calm, but could it be that A wants to be able to show something to the airlines and say see we have something to compete with B and maybe they could stall some sales to B or convince some airlines away from B all together?
RedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4175 posts, RR: 30 Reply 23, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4699 times:
Quoting Charger (Reply 22): could it be that A wants to be able to show something to the airlines and say see we have something to compete with B and maybe they could stall some sales
That's exactly why they will go ahead with an "industrial launch". At this point, they need to preserve potential future orders for their XWB.
Quoting Charger (Reply 22): or convince some airlines away from B all together?
Unless they have a solid (real) offering, they will never take orders away from B altogether.
B707Stu From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 918 posts, RR: 4 Reply 24, posted (6 years 7 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 4554 times:
Quoting Lumberton (Reply 6): It appears that there is now great concern in the UK about the extent of Airbus UK's participation in the A350:
Showdown as UK fights for role in Airbus A350
Quote:
THE Government is braced for a confrontation with Airbus today over the aircraft manufacturer’s continued presence in the UK after it emerged that British representatives have not been included in the planning committee for the A350, the next Airbus project.
Evidence that Britain is being sidelined from the planning of the A350 project will raise the temperature at a meeting in London today when Alastair Darling, the Trade and Industry Secretary, will discuss future British government investment in the project with Louis Gallois, the head of Airbus, and Tom Enders, the head of EADS, Airbus’s parent.
Fears are growing that Britain’s weakened position will mean that Airbus’s Broughton plant in North Wales, which makes aircraft wings, may miss out on a share in the $10 billion (£5.3 billion) investment, putting at risk some 13,000 jobs.
The appointment of a British representative to the EADS board may also be in doubt. The Times has learnt that EADS is also looking at US and Commonwealth citizens who would be responsible only nominally for overseeing its UK operations.
So what's the liklihood of the British aligning with Boeing and dropping Airbus all together? Now that would be interesting, wouldn't it?
25 Ikramerica: The british really lament losing their last manufacturer of airframes in 2002. Perhaps Boeing and the various british entities could be partners on t
27 Lumberton: IMO, not much. A sizeable investment has been made in the UK wing works. I simiply can't see this work going anywhere else soon, at least not if Airb
28 Ruscoe: My thoughts are: 1.The UK should abandon Europe and go with the USA if they can. Build wings for the 737 replacement. Offer to contribute the money Ai
29 Atlbill: Actually, EADS will need to approve the A350XWB. Simply put, AB without a wide body to compete with will also sacrifice their A320 sales. (Note how th
30 Trex8: are you talking about the A345/6 specifically or the whole A340 program as the A330 and 340 programs were developed together and initially the A330 w
31 Ikramerica: Actually, he meant 270. 55% is right, it's the 250 that's wrong...
32 Leelaw: Actually, IIRC, the 270 "break-even" estimate (19% IRR) announced by Airbus in 2005 (prior to the first major program delay), was an upward revision
33 Jacobin777: I went off of the 250 number..for which 420 is 68% more sales needed.... ((250)*.68+250)=420 Cheers...
34 Scouseflyer: Not necessarily true - the mere presence or lack of a particular technology doesn't make something a sucess or not. It's the whole package that's imp
35 Ikramerica: I mean, when taken as a whole, 342/343/345/346/345HGW/345HGW they likely didn't make much. I know the 330/340 were developed together. I am just sayi
36 Baroque: Would not that be ironical! That could be a new leader's initiative, I doubt if Holy T would entertain it but a newbie might to show willing in Europ
Sponsor Message: 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3254 posts, 
)
From Lithuania, joined Aug 2004, 10511 posts, 
From Puerto Rico, joined Jul 2006, 671 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
