Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Boeing-produced A3XX  
User currently offlineMls515 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3076 posts, RR: 9
Posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1403 times:

Not that they would do this, but could Boeing buy a liscense from Airbus to produce it's own clones of the A3XX?

This is about as likely as a snowball in hell, but imagine Boeing cancelling the superjumbo 747X and 747X stretch and phasing out the 747-400/400X in favor of the A3XX clone. It would force the industry to accept the larger A3XX while saving them development money on their planned superjumbos.

An interesting thought.....You can tell it's 2am where I am!  

17 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineSingapore_Air From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2000, 13745 posts, RR: 19
Reply 1, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1321 times:

Probably not, that would just show copy-catness on the part of Boeing. And it would damage their reputation and ego and esteem.


Anyone can fly, only the best Soar.
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 2, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1295 times:

I'll through you a more interesting possiblity.....

A couple of months ago I heard a rumor that Boeing was going to make a bid on Bae. Correct me if I am wrong but Bae builds the Airbus wings and is a risk sharing partner. If that rumored bid/buyout was to be true and successful you could be Boeing a member of the Airbus consortium......

And you think politics where interesting.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMls515 From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 3076 posts, RR: 9
Reply 3, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 1285 times:

Maybe if they bought Bae they'd have an interest in seeing the A3XX succeed?

If the impossible became a reality (in regard to Boing building A3XXs) how would the logistics work on the U.S. side? Who'd make what? And how would it come together?


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1281 times:

I guess the sign at Milton(???) would read Bae and then in small print...A Boeing Company....

Besides they fly complete Lear 45 Cabins from Shorts in Ireland. There must be some backhaul somewhere for them.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineMattNZ From New Zealand, joined Sep 2000, 150 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1272 times:

I can't see it! Why would boeing phase-out the most recognized symbol of the 20th century? The 747 is here to stay and I can see a full upper deck in the future.


User currently offlineFly-By-Pilot From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 209 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 1267 times:

Are you stupid!!!!

User currently offlineCPDC10-30 From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 4791 posts, RR: 23
Reply 7, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1248 times:

Besides they fly complete Lear 45 Cabins from Shorts in Ireland. There must be some backhaul somewhere for them.

Don't forget that Bombardier has bought out both of those companies.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 1242 times:

Yup...Those are both owned by Ski-Doo.

The point I was making was that Ski-Doo is able to fly fairly substantial subcomponents from Ireland and Japan. So there is no reason why somebody else could fly parts from North America to Europe.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineA student From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1225 times:

As far as I know, the original A3XX project (flying wing etc) was a cooperation between Boeing and Airbus. It failed because it was too expensive and too far into the future.

Anyway: Why should Boeing even consider becoming someone else's production plant? We're talking about Boeing here, not a small Israeli company producing Dornier428 Jets or a small Romanian company producing BAC 1-11s.

Maybe Boeing should ask Airbus to use its production lines for producing 777s and 747s, and to scrap the A340-600...

Just kidding about that last senctence!


User currently offlineMx5_boy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 1217 times:

Mls515,

A very interesting thought and one that is not that far fetched. With globalisation on the increase, in theory it would make great economical sense for Boeing and Airbus to combine forces and be the dominant force in aircraft manufacture. Boeing could concentrate on it's strenghts and AI the same.

Just look at the globalisation of banks and financial institutions. Most people probably don't even know that their local bank that they may think is local is actually owened by Chase or some other huge major player.

Look at the stakes in different airlines that different carriers have. All in the name of business and shareholder profit. Another example are the telecom companies. Small national co's are being swallowed up by the big guns in the name of globalisation.

Wait and see what happens when we are left in the world with a few major corporations controlling everything. You will find that conservative attitudes to big business running everything will change, except for those that will benifit.

The globalisation of the worlds business, is a reverse form of competition, which has been forced upon the world nations in the name of free enterprise and "privatisation". I am not a communist but can see the writing on the wall when you find that instead of a creative government looking after the peoples interests (like power, transport, hospitals and fresh water) you find that it's a big business that has decided that your water supply will be cut forthwith as you are two days late with your payment. For whatever reason you are then forced to pay a reconnection fee of $2000.

Why are you forced? Because of the ideals of privatisation / globalisation has allowed your current choice of providors to be taken over into one big company. The difference this time is that it's not the government that you have to pay you water rates too, it's a large company that doesn't give a rats if your water is disconected. You have no other choice as there is no other provider of the service. Instead of a democraticaly elected government to answer for it you will have a big global company to deal with. Good luck!!

Make any sense to anyone?

mb



User currently offlineMac100 From United States of America, joined Oct 2000, 260 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 1207 times:

NO!

User currently offlineCorey777 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1196 times:

If Boeing produced A3XX parts, wouldn't Boeing's airliners then cease to exist as a seperate brand?

So we'd all be flying on Airbus 777s and Airbus MD-90s as well as the current Airbus 300 series...That would eliminate the Boeing/Airbus wars, as there would be no more Boeing...

Corey777


User currently offlinePrebennorholm From Denmark, joined Mar 2000, 6495 posts, RR: 54
Reply 13, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 1172 times:

The whole idea is of course hypotetical. All developed countries have some sort of "competition control authority", and a A/B merge would obviously never be granted.
Anyway, if we imagine that it was possible, then there would be a lot of technical obstacles, and here comes maybe the worst:
When a new type gets its certification, then it is not just the blueprints which are certified. It is also the manufacturing processes of almost every single component, quality check procedures and all such things.

New subject: Mx5_boy, you are so right. I copied your post for non-aviation purposes. You said it so well.

Best regards, Preben Norholm



Always keep your number of landings equal to your number of take-offs, Preben Norholm
User currently offlineWingman From Seychelles, joined May 1999, 2298 posts, RR: 5
Reply 14, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 1157 times:

Boeing and Airbus discussed this in the past, so it's not impossible. What it would mean is a rebranding of the A3XX project as a JV with Boeing ponying up at least $6BB. This would save both partners a lot of money in the rollout and the result would be a complete monopoly of VLAs. Boeing rules out the 745 and 746 and guess what? No more discounts because there's no competition. Boeing could still roll out an updated version of the 744 as a step between the 777-340 and A3XX while AB continues to develop the 340 series. Now I see some real profit potential for the A3XX.

Still this is unlikely. The airlines would howl in protest. More likely is the Boeing purchase of BAe's defense units and the sale of the Airbus unit to EADS.


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29805 posts, RR: 58
Reply 15, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 1126 times:

And I could see the marketing slogans.....

Airbus can talk about us but can't fly without us.

It may be an Airbus but it uses our wings.

(fill in the blank)% Boeing product





Corey777.....

It could just as easly be the Boeing 320, Boeing 330 Boeing 340 ect.....



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineHmmmm... From Canada, joined May 1999, 2104 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1094 times:

Co-operation in business is always more profitable than competition. By rights, Boeing and Airbus should go in cohorts on the super jumbo. That way the risk is halved, as is the start-up capital. And it is just those two issues, risks and capital, that have stopped Boeing from going ahead with a super jumbo of its own.

How many here are aware that arch rivals, GE and Pratt & Whitney, are already in business making a new line of engines?

Nor do I see a reason why such a co-operation on a super jumbo would, or could, be blocked. It would not be an amalgamation of the two companies, but merely a co-operation on one product line. That happens all the time. The US has anti-trust laws but those apply to American companies removing other American competition from a US market. They have no jurisdiction over foreign companies in a global market. And let's face it, Boeing swallowed MD, making Boeing the only manufacturer of commercial airliners in the US. A perfect case for the application of anti-trust laws, but they were not invoked.


Hmmmm...






An optimist robs himself of the joy of being pleasantly surprised
User currently offlineAdy From Panama, joined Nov 2000, 166 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (13 years 11 months 3 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1068 times:

Probably not, it'll be bad for their image to copy their rival Airbus.


If u ever feel depressed about urself, just remember that at one time you were the most vicious sperm in ur group.
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...
A3XX Launched..Boeing's Move? posted Tue Dec 19 2000 16:18:19 by CX747
Did Boeing 747x Lose To A3xx B/c Of No 747-600? posted Sun Dec 17 2000 00:55:38 by Sm92
Boeing Says No Head To Head Between 747X And A3XX posted Fri Oct 13 2000 23:46:21 by Delta777-XXX
Analysts Take On A3XX & Boeing posted Tue Oct 3 2000 02:11:30 by Navion
Boeing's Trump Card Over The A3XX posted Sat Sep 30 2000 23:59:26 by AirCanadaSFO
Boeing Shines As Airbus & A3XX Stumble. posted Wed Jul 5 2000 20:09:31 by CX747
Boeing's Answer To A3XX? posted Sun Jun 25 2000 00:57:55 by Speedbird777
ILA 2000 In Berlin! A3XX And Boeing... posted Mon Jun 5 2000 14:47:34 by Udo
Boeing's Answer To The A3XX. posted Tue May 2 2000 15:29:37 by CX747
Boeing Unveils 787 Timetable posted Sun Mar 11 2007 14:15:28 by Lostturttle