Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Back On Track?  
User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8691 times:

Earlier, Airbus had a severe crises.

-The A380 was late again and again.

-The A350 was rejected by major customers like SQ and and ILFC and publicly bashed by their bosses.

Currently, there is a lot of good news.

-The A380 weight and wiring problems are solved, deliveries will start next year, even surpassing the latest schedule seems likely. Then, big money will come in.

-The A350XWB has been launched, it will be available four or five years later than the 787, but it will also be four or five years younger. The 787 may have more orders, but major players like CX, LH, AF/KL, BA, SA)">AA, SA)">UA, IB, SU, TG, EK, EY, SA, AZ, BR, CA, etc. have not yet made their decision. In addition, 75% of the orders for the 787 are the -8 version, some carriers might combine that with the A359 and A3510. Besides, Airbus does offer a cargo plane and also has some substantial customers like US, JJ, SQ, QR or IT.

-The A32X are selling like crazy, even building 40 per month would not make the five-year backlog smaller.

-The A330 is still selling strong, it seems likely that its line will continue until the A350 enters service. The A332F will be launched soon, that will provide for additional income. It seems to me that this levels the lack of A340 sales out. Airbus could sell more A340s by lowering the price, but why do that when the same line makes more money with the A330s?

-Airbus updated its spreadsheet on December 1st. Normally they need at least a week before they do that. They seem to be picking up speed.

After all, it seems to me that the crises comes to an end.

64 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBR076 From Netherlands, joined May 2005, 1086 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8647 times:

Quoting Thorben (Thread starter):
After all, it seems to me that the crises comes to an end.

I agree

but

You will be got so flamed for this statement Big grin



ú
User currently offlineSA7700 From South Africa, joined Dec 2003, 3431 posts, RR: 26
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8636 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD MODERATOR

Quoting Thorben (Thread starter):
SA, AZ, BR, CA, etc. have not yet made their decision

To my knowledge SA is not looking for widebody twins, but quads.


Rgds

SA7700



When you are doing stuff that nobody has done before, there is no manual – Kevin McCloud (Grand Designs)
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30566 posts, RR: 84
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8640 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

The news as of late is certainly better, but Airbus still needs to gain control of their configuration process on the A388 to ensure they can get those planes out the door.

And we still know pretty much nothing about the A350XWB other then Airbus saying it will be fantastic, but they said the same thing about the A350NSWB.

The news is certainly positive, however. But the proof, as they say, is in the CFRP panels and the wiring.  Wink


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8614 times:

Quoting BR076 (Reply 1):

You will be got so flamed for this statement Big grin

Don't worry, I'm used to it.

Quoting SA7700 (Reply 2):
To my knowledge SA is not looking for widebody twins, but quads.

Maybe, but when the choice is between the 787 and the A350, it'll be hard to get a quad.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):

I agree, the proof is still to come, this far we rather have indications.


User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8611 times:

I'm not trying to stir up any dirt here, but the A350 being 5 years younger isn't worth much here. This isn't an alum. plane with 5 more years of R/D in it.

This is a next generation aircraft built without complete next generation materials, 5 years later.


---
That said, it does sound like Airbus has been having things go it's way. A32X production is great.


The A380 might just take to the skies in commerical service soon, and even at $4B and 2+ years over budget, it will certainly be a moral victory. Airbus healthy and focused is the best thing for the aviation community.



They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offline11Bravo From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 1717 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 8565 times:

"This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning."

Winston Churchill, 1942

Sill quite a ways to go to get "back on track" IMHO. The problems at Airbus weren't created over-night and they're not going to be solved over-night either.



WhaleJets Rule!
User currently offlineLHStarAlliance From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8504 times:

Quoting Thorben (Thread starter):
After all, it seems to me that the crises comes to an end.

I agree , they are solving the problems pretty good.

Yet airbus is in a better position as boeing , they have :

320: they´ll start new generation soon and still selling very very good

330 :selling good , freighter comming out soon.

350XWB: For 777 , 330 , 340 , 747 better engines than 787 so better economics. More space . Also freighter

380 : Very Large Aircraft will not sell as good as 350 or 330 but some Airlines still have options on it and I highly doubt that no more airlines will buy it .
Wiring problems solved.

So now Boeing is in a better position , but Airbus is coming ! And well-equipped!


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8465 times:

Quoting BlatantEcho (Reply 5):
This is a next generation aircraft built without complete next generation materials, 5 years later.

What materials will the A350 have that are less 'next gen' then the 787?

Being 14 years later than the A330 has not exactly affected the 787's sales prospects. All of airbus' successful models came later than their Boeing or MDD counterparts.


User currently offlineThorben From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8451 times:

Quoting BlatantEcho (Reply 5):
I'm not trying to stir up any dirt here, but the A350 being 5 years younger isn't worth much here. This isn't an alum. plane with 5 more years of R/D in it.

This is a next generation aircraft built without complete next generation materials, 5 years later.

I disagree. It will have a slightly higher percentage of composites than the 787, which is not all composite either. Airbus only choses a different approach. They'll have their reasons, maybe the maintenance is really a lot easier. Airbus has a lot of experience with composites.

Quoting 11Bravo (Reply 6):
Sill quite a ways to go to get "back on track" IMHO. The problems at Airbus weren't created over-night and they're not going to be solved over-night either.

Not over night, but the second half of 2006 saw a lot of positive aspects.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30566 posts, RR: 84
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8438 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LHStarAlliance (Reply 7):
Yet airbus is in a better position as boeing , they have:

320: they´ll start new generation soon and still selling very very good

We're assuming the A320E will launch. Airbus may not want to devote the capital to it since the returns aren't looking as good as before (now like 2-3% instead of 5% greater efficiency). That being said, increase production should win them more orders thanks to greater availability.

Quote:
330 :selling good , freighter coming out soon.

The A332F should sell well, even in the face of 767 and A330 passenger-to-freighter conversions, though the sales window on the A330 itself is closing.

Quote:
350XWB: For 777, 330, 340, 747 better engines than 787 so better economics. More space. Also freighter.

We're not sure how much better the XWB's engines are going to be. The original Trent 1700's used, I believe, the same core as the Trent 1000's going on the 787. I don't expect RR to play too fast and loose with the Trent XWB's core vis-a-vis the Trent 1000's.

Also, we don't know how the XWB's economics are going to come out, though they should be good. It's pretty much a given they should be better then the 777's and they will probably be very close (a bit better or worse) to the 787's. The 787 will probably be the more advanced platform, and will have benefited from lessons learned and efficiencies gained in five years of active service before the first A350XWB takes to the skies.

Quote:
380: Wiring problems solved.

That remains to be seen. Airbus felt that way in the past, yet ended up taking additional delays on the problem.


User currently offlineLHStarAlliance From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8419 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 10):
we don't know how the XWB's economics are going to come out, t

In farnborough Airbus said that the economics will be better than the 787s economics.


User currently offlineSSTsomeday From Canada, joined Oct 2006, 1276 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8397 times:

I agree that there are three very good developments:

1) The 350 has been green lit, and Airbus needs it badly, and customers say they want it.
2) The 380's wiring issues apparently have been solved.
3) Airbus is seeking risk partners and developing (if I am reading my news correctly) more outsourcing. I think the Chinese assembly line (320) is a good idea, at least in the short term.

Also, the tremendous success of the 320 (and the success of the 330) are proving to be lifesavers at the moment.

The challenges are:

1) DEFINING/designing the 350 so that it will offer some of the lofty claims that the salesmen are selling at the moment.

2) Increasing the production rate of the 380 for the first few years.

3) Recouping the loss of billions of Euros due to the 380 delay. This means acquiring more orders, as well as pumping up production.

4) Streamlining their management, and removing the lugubrious and inefficient government thumb(s) they are under, as well as any inefficiencies born of having originated as a multinational consortium.

So I believe the pressure is on at Airbus, in the next few years, to aggressively meet these challenges. The news IS good, but they are not out of the woods yet.

I predict it will take several years before they get back to par with Boeing regarding the value of their respective annual orders.



I come in peace
User currently offlineLokey123 From Barbados, joined May 2006, 138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8339 times:

Quoting LHStarAlliance (Reply 11):
In farnborough Airbus said that the economics will be better than the 787s economics.

And because Airbus says it that makes it true. Can you make some comparisons please to back that up? Which model A350 are they comparing to which model 787? what assumptions go into this comparison, I'll believe when I see and even then it is open to scrutiny.


User currently offlineGBan From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8308 times:

Quoting Thorben (Thread starter):
-The A380 weight and wiring problems are solved, deliveries will start next year, even surpassing the latest schedule seems likely. Then, big money will come in.

I think the problems have been solved and they will be on track when they are on track (with deliveries), not when they announce it.

Quoting LHStarAlliance (Reply 11):
In farnborough Airbus said that the economics will be better than the 787s economics.



Quoting Lokey123 (Reply 13):
And because Airbus says it that makes it true. Can you make some comparisons please to back that up? Which model A350 are they comparing to which model 787? what assumptions go into this comparison, I'll believe when I see and even then it is open to scrutiny.

It wont't be true because Airbus says it, but Airbus will have to make it true to sell this plane.


User currently offlineKSUpilot From United States of America, joined exactly 8 years ago today! , 656 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 8301 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
The news is certainly positive, however. But the proof, as they say, is in the CFRP panels and the wiring. Wink

And we have yet to see how those panels will work out. In another thread there was a post that stated that Boeing was thinking of using CFRP panels, but found that really you would be left with "black aluminum" as you would need all the heavy hardware and whatnot to join them together.


User currently offlineLokey123 From Barbados, joined May 2006, 138 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8230 times:

Quoting GBan (Reply 14):
It wont't be true because Airbus says it, but Airbus will have to make it true to sell this plane

I think that the plane will sell regardless of whether it's true or not. The question then becomes how much of them will, to who, and at what price. Besides when there's a duopoly in a market of this size and value I don't think that either player stands to lose their shirt, maybe just some pissed customers.


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4315 posts, RR: 28
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8190 times:

Quoting Thorben (Thread starter):
Currently, there is a lot of good news.

Be prepared for some additional bad news coming Airbus' way via the A400M...

http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2006/12/03/afx3223263.html



I'm not a racist...I hate Biden, too.
User currently offlineBoomBoom From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8159 times:

Quoting Thorben (Reply 9):
Not over night, but the second half of 2006 saw a lot of positive aspects

Like delaying the A380 by another year?

The compensation payments and profit warnings?

The Virgin A380 deferral (cancellation)?

The Fedex A380 cancellation?

This has been a disastrous year for Airbus no matter how you parse it or spin it.


User currently offlineBrendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8109 times:

Quoting LHStarAlliance (Reply 11):
In farnborough Airbus said that the economics will be better than the 787s economics.

Airbus said the exact same thing about the first few versions of the A350, but did the airlines buy that? No. Don't believe something just because Airbus' PR department says so. When more info about the A350XWB is released, we'll know a little more. But when it comes to the A350XWBvs787, it doesn't look to promising (lifting more weight=higher fuel burn.)


User currently offlineBlatantEcho From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 1903 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8080 times:

I'm simply saying that if this was a normal aluminum plane, then YES, the A350 would have a few more technologies, more advanced this and that, just because it's 5 years newer.

However, it's a carbon fiber world now. Look at industries that currently use carbon on large capital projects. Look at yachts made of carbon/nomex.

Nobody is using panels and attatching them to a skeleton. The companies that aren't capable of full uniform carbon lay-up, don't even bother with carbon, they stick with traditional fiberglass and epoxy/vinylester.


If your competitor has the capability to weave a complete barrel, and 5 years later, you can't weave a complete barrel, your best efficeny gain will be increasing size to lower seatmile costs. This is not the same as structural efficency from 5 more years of R/D and new technology.

Engine technology might be the best bet for the A350, but after a bunch of companies have dropped piles of money on new generations of engines (Gen X, etc) I don't know if you're going to get the same leap from the 787 engines to the 350 engines as you did from 767 to 787 engines.

[Edited 2006-12-03 20:53:04]


They're not handing trophies out today
User currently offlineHB88 From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2005, 814 posts, RR: 31
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 8075 times:

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 15):
Quoting Stitch (Reply 3):
"The news is certainly positive, however. But the proof, as they say, is in the CFRP panels and the wiring."

And we have yet to see how those panels will work out. In another thread there was a post that stated that Boeing was thinking of using CFRP panels, but found that really you would be left with "black aluminum" as you would need all the heavy hardware and whatnot to join them together.

It's not just the presence of cfrp in an airframe, it's how it is used. In any case, a proper comparison between the panel approach and the fibre-wound barrel approach can only be made once you know the relative dimensions of the panels and the internal fuselage structure etc. I don't think it's quite as simple as adding in the hardware to join the panel sections and concluding that it will be inferior/heavier than a segmented barrel design. Remember that even a spun barrel section needs significant hardware to support the internal fuselage structure, centre section, reinforcing around doors, as well as the circumferential joins etc.

I wonder that in certain configurations, there might be relatively little between the Boeing and Airbus approach - particularly as bonding technologies have come a long way and the panel approach might allow slightly more flexibility in load tailoring than a mandrel spun barrel in some configurations - although the Boeing technique looks locally quite flexible.

A "black aluminium" approach is characterised by simply substituting cfrp for metal in an airframe and not exploiting the non-isotropic properties of cfrp materials and components. I don't believe the Airbus approach is going this way as, while the panel technique looks superficially like black metal, as has been written elsewhere, there are some interesting opportunities to take advantage of cfrp properties.


User currently offlineLHStarAlliance From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8076 times:

Quoting Brendows (Reply 20):
Airbus said the exact same thing about the first few versions of the A350, but did the airlines buy that? No. Don't believe something just because Airbus' PR department says so. When more info about the A350XWB is released, we'll know a little more. But when it comes to the A350XWBvs787, it doesn't look to promising (lifting more weight=higher fuel burn.)

I just say that they have said this . For sure they have to prove this first .

About new engines : Maybe they get EA and RR or RR and GE to build a new engine that could be used then also for a possible 389.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30566 posts, RR: 84
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8054 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting LHStarAlliance (Reply 11):
In Farnborough Airbus said that the economics will be better than the 787s economics.

And yet when Boeing and members of this board say the 748's economics are better then the A388's, they are pilloried...

Quoting KSUpilot (Reply 15):
And we have yet to see how those panels will work out. In another thread there was a post that stated that Boeing was thinking of using CFRP panels, but found that really you would be left with "black aluminum" as you would need all the heavy hardware and whatnot to join them together.

Airbus has noted how easily their design will be to fix via replacing damaged panels, so I tend to think that using glue or embedding an Al-Li "edge" that could be laser-welded to the sub-frame won't happen because of the time needed to remove it. So I can only guess they will rivet it to the frame like is done now.

Also, I wonder if Airbus' design won't be more likely to suffer "ramp rash" then Boeing's, hence forcing Airbus to offer an easy replacement system. Take, for example, two paper towel cardboard tubes. And accept up front that this is not a perfect analogy and it is not offered as a compelling argument.  Wink

Unroll one and leave the other rolled-up. Take a butter knife or a spoon and give a good stab to the rolled-up tube. Chances are it won't even dent, much less be sliced. Yet use the same amount of force on the unrolled tube, and it will go right through. The cardboard layered on top of each other offers more strength and resilience to impact then when it is laid flat.

Therefore, Airbus may need to use thicker panels or denser (and heavier) CFRP compounds to provide the same levels of damage resistance Boeing's "continuous rolled" CFRP barrels offer.

Again, until we see some data, we don't know. It's freely conjecture on my part, but many have been critical how successfully Boeing's process will resist damage and I believe that Boeing's process could very well be stronger then Airbus', which means if Boeing needs to worry about damage, Airbus does even more-so.


User currently offlineEI321 From Iraq, joined Jul 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 3 weeks 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 8021 times:

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 18):
The Virgin A380 deferral (cancellation)?

What have they ''(canceled)''

??????????????


25 Jacobin777 : Considering the previous Airbus CEO Christian Strieff stated that Airbus is almost a decade behind, I think its way to premature to say "Airbus is bac
26 HB88 : Nice analogy! But I don't think that's quite how it works. The Airbus structure wouldn't behave as an 'unrolled tube'. The local strength (wrong word
27 Post contains images HB88 : VS haven't canceled anything. However, some people on a.net have decided that when VS deferred their order, they really meant cancellation. Someone s
28 BillReid : I do not what is in your Coolaid! The crisis is long from over....... If it was this easy there would have been no crisis.... Truth be told, the A350
29 Adria : Considering that the EIS will be 5 years later and that Airbus will also benefit from additional time the only way the A350XWB is going to be success
30 Leelaw : Nevertheless, the second, rather lengthy deferral (deliveries commencing in 2013) by VS of its A380 order should be just as disturbing as an outright
31 Post contains images SSTsomeday : But the aircraft is not yet defined, so that claim is not yet verifiable nor does it come from any available statistics. I wonder if it's Airbus' int
32 Mariner : So it is your view that they are falling further behind? mariner
33 Post contains images BoomBoom : I thought the A380 was still more than 5 tons overweight. What is the source of the information that the wiring problem has been solved? And won't on
34 Rheinbote : Sorry to rain on your parade, but the crisis would come to an end only if the underlying problems were solved - you can't do that in days or months,
35 Post contains images Jacobin777 : Possibly..yes.... Considering the 787-8 is substantially outselling the 787-9, Airbus is leaving a large hole in their platform.....that's just my op
36 HB88 : It's not surprising there is/was resistance - no organisation wants to cut headcount. In any case, many if not most of Strieffs original recommendati
37 Grantcv : It seems that every six months Airbus trots out good news and it looks like their problems are behind them. But after a few weeks, reality sets in and
38 BoomBoom : The last I heard there was considerable resistance to job cuts. Has something changed in this regard?
39 Mariner : Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought whichever way they went they would leave a hole in their platform. mariner
40 HB88 : It depends on where you consider the resistance to be coming from. Job cuts are still of course politically unpalatable, but depending on the country
41 Post contains images Jacobin777 : We'll see what happens.. Unless the A350 is a dismal failure, which I think it won't be...they will get a very good ROI....[Edited 2006-12-04 00:59:4
42 Post contains links BoomBoom : Yes, while there may be a consensus within the company management on implementing job cuts and closing or selling plants, I haven't heard the politic
43 SSTsomeday : If true, that's good news for Airbus. That is just as important as the launch of the 350 and fixing 380 production problems and sales deficiencies. T
44 Post contains images Stitch : If it's in the same ballpark as the 787, it should do fine. Many A330 and A340 operators will prefer to stick with Airbus and if Airbus can offer the
45 Post contains images Glideslope : You can't survive being a One Pony show. Increasing 6 airframes per month is no small project. Boeing got caught up in this in the ealy 80's. They le
46 Jacobin777 : Key word.."upgrade"..many carriers might not want to upgrade the amount of seats...actually, given how well the 788 is selling, many aren't. Add the
47 BoomBoom : I can't imagine any govt. "launch aid" coming without strings attached. Why should French and German taxpayers money be spent to send jobs to other c
48 Trex8 : because sometimes its better to lose 1 job rather than 2 or 3 or 4
49 PADSpot : That is in my opinion the real surprise. Boeing put the main emphasis on the 220-300pax range, while the A350XWB is more targeted at the 250-350+pax
50 Post contains links and images AutoThrust : Correct, always same thing when its about Airbus on A.net. Seems that has been forgot but the A350 will have at least 10 percent or more composites a
51 Revelation : I know you are knowledgeable so I will ask: since Airbus says the panelled approach will allow panels to be substituted, how does one use strong bond
52 Vfw614 : How exactly ? What are the next available B787 delivery slots ? To say it is five years behind the B787 is quite irrelevant for those airlines that h
53 Revelation : IMHO, yes. This is not the Airbus that pushed way ahead on fly-by-wire etc on A320. To this day, the 737 has not caught up in cockpit automation. Thi
54 Post contains images Astuteman : Although, interestingly, Willie Walsh of BA has today stated that the A350's timing is "Just right for BA"........ I believe BA are an airline.......
55 Brendows : The 787 is about 50% composite by weight, while the A350, according to their press conference, would be 52% by parts, that's two completely different
56 Astuteman : That would surprise me if the fuselage is primarily composite too. IIRC, the aluminium fused A350 with composite wings etc was about 38% composite. I
57 Stitch : But in five years - and almost ten years in the case of the A3510 - Airbus can only offer the A333, which lacks the range to service 772ER routes. So
58 Post contains links Revelation : The press conference said the panels will be made of the most suitable material and would use Al for internals: http://www1.airliners.net/discussion.
59 Post contains images Brendows : Hi Astuteman The difference may not be that large, but I highly doubt that it will have a higher usage of composites by weight than the 787 does, simp
60 Post contains images Astuteman : Hi Brendows. Thanks for the reply. Me neither. I believe you would be correct in that. I'm pretty sure some (but not all) of the A380 floor beams are
61 DAYflyer : I think they are begining to emerge from the crises which gripped the whole of the company for the last year or two. Funny how a competitors new produ
62 Post contains images Stitch : Indeed. Just ask Boeing about the A320...
63 Mariner : I'm puzzled that Mr. Streif would assume that. As a very recent CEO, however briefly, perhaps he knew what the A350XWB would be? mariner
64 Post contains links and images Brendows : You're welcome, and thanks to you too Heh, it seems like your memory has served you well earlier, at least in here, so I wouldn't worry too much abou
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...
Airbus Is On Track For Record Deliveries In 2006 posted Tue Aug 8 2006 17:41:19 by Leelaw
A380 Back On Track After Delays posted Sun Sep 25 2005 09:55:12 by Milan320
After 14 Years, Beirut Airport Back On Track posted Thu May 6 2004 04:38:10 by BA
Airlines Back On Track! posted Tue Jan 20 2004 00:10:01 by Usnseallt82
SAS Back On Track: Q2 Profit Of 121M US$ posted Wed Aug 7 2002 15:08:40 by TR
SN Brussels Airlines Back On Track posted Tue Mar 19 2002 22:25:31 by Luchtzak
FI: Airbus To Offer Customers Cash Back On A340s posted Mon Jan 23 2006 11:29:54 by Leelaw
First Choice And MyTravel Merger Back On The Cards posted Mon Nov 27 2006 13:23:44 by Gilesdavies
Is The Aeroflot - 787 Deal Back On? posted Thu Nov 16 2006 19:38:33 by NYC777
Air NZ On Track To Announce NZD$140 Million Profit posted Wed Aug 23 2006 07:24:23 by 1Des1