Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Eads Halts Work On Freight Version Of A380  
User currently offlineAirMailer From United States of America, joined May 2006, 469 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12416 times:

I just saw this on WSJ.
I looked but didn't see anything other than the UPS Post (I assume that this wasn't contained in there).
Sorry if it ended up bein a double-post.


DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
March 1, 2007 11:59 a.m.

FRANKFURT (Dow Jones)--European Aeronautic Defence & Space Co. NV (5730.FR), or EADS, Thursday told Dow Jones Newswires it has halted work on the freight version of its A380 jet.

93 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirTran737 From United States of America, joined Apr 2004, 3705 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12427 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I don't think any of us are surprised.



filler



Nice Trip Report!!! Great Pics, thanks for posting!!!! B747Forever
User currently offlinePEET7G From Hungary, joined Jan 2007, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 12342 times:

Just wish playing the Lottery would be that easy...  duck 


Anyway, a good decision IMO.



Peet7G
User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4365 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12191 times:

There is a new development schedule for the freight version A380F, he said, adding that the company sees sales potential for 400 models of the A380 freight aircraft in the next 20 years.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...s/EU-FIN-Germany-France-Airbus.php


I've been reading about the 400 models of the freight version for the last 10 years. I wonder which 20 year period they are talking about? It's sounding more and more like a self-perpetuating mantra.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 6961 posts, RR: 46
Reply 4, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12162 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 3):
There is a new development schedule for the freight version A380F, he said, adding that the company sees sales potential for 400 models of the A380 freight aircraft in the next 20 years.

They'll be a lot more visible to mark closed runways throughout the world than just those yellow X's-that's the only way I can see 400 of them in use.
 duck 



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineTravelin man From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 3529 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12160 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 3):
the company sees sales potential for 400 models of the A380 freight aircraft in the next 20 years.

??? They are stopping the development of an aircraft for which they see a market of 400 aircraft in the next 20 years? Even though their biggest potential customers have either cancelled or "postponed" their orders by 10 years?

Do they really believe what they say?


User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5790 posts, RR: 47
Reply 6, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12119 times:

Comment from UPS, not good:

United Parcel Service Inc., Airbus's only remaining customer
for the plane, said the Airbus move took it by surprise.
''We've not made any decision,'' Mark Giuffre, a spokesman for
UPS's airline operations, said in an interview. UPS never asked for
a delay in the A380 freighter program, he said.
''Airbus has had problems in terms of delivering the aircraft
in the A380 program,'' he said. ''It has not been UPS asking for
delays in the program.'



That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
User currently offlineSangas From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 12010 times:

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 3):
There is a new development schedule for the freight version A380F, he said, adding that the company sees sales potential for 400 models of the A380 freight aircraft in the next 20 years.

Even David Sutton's (of FX) very sanguine projection back in 2005 was for a much smaller worldwide fleet in 20 years and that estimate was inclusive of conversions as well:

Quote:
Sutton says he expects that there will be "a fleet of 200 A380 freighters in the marketplace over the next 20 years".

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...380f-fleet-expansion-strategy.html


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4365 posts, RR: 28
Reply 8, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11986 times:

Here's an update from Bloomberg:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...s/EU-FIN-Germany-France-Airbus.php

Airbus Chief Executive Louis Gallois said yesterday in an interview that he expected United Parcel Service Inc., Airbus's only remaining customer for the freighter, to postpone its order for 10 planes by a decade and said then that Airbus would soon make a decision on whether to push back plans for the plane.

Asked then whether Airbus expected to keep the planes in its order book as a deferral, or book them as cancellations, he said he didn't know yet, as it would depend on UPS and what happened to pre-delivery payments.


By stopping development of the F model, it sounds like Airbus unilaterally made the decision for UPS.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlinePEET7G From Hungary, joined Jan 2007, 695 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 11917 times:

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 6):
United Parcel Service Inc., Airbus's only remaining customer
for the plane, said the Airbus move took it by surprise.
''We've not made any decision,'' Mark Giuffre, a spokesman for
UPS's airline operations, said in an interview. UPS never asked for
a delay in the A380 freighter program, he said.
''Airbus has had problems in terms of delivering the aircraft
in the A380 program,'' he said. ''It has not been UPS asking for
delays in the program.'

Could this be true? Could it be that Airbus took decision without reconciling with UPS? Could it be that the earlier comments from the Airbus pipeline, that UPS will delay it's order for 10 years was a plain decision from the side of Airbus? I find it hard to believe that this decision took UPS with surprise and that they had no knowledge of this coming. If so... then the behaviour of Airbus is simply outrageous, and deserves every bad thing coming to them! I just can't believe it was so... this would be to much to get away with... No, this can not be true... NO ONE can get away with such business behaviour...

I still believe there is some sort of agreement behind the scenes, and that it was a decision made together with UPS, and as already discussed... a win-win situation for both.



Peet7G
User currently offlineDouwd20 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11852 times:

This means the 747-8F has no competition for many years to come.

User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11742 times:

Quoting Douwd20 (Reply 10):
This means the 747-8F has no competition for many years to come.

Yes it does -- the 744 BCF.


Side issue:

Given that the city of Hamburg has invested many hundreds of millions of Euros in the Airbus plant in Hamburg, not to mention the expansion of the run way at XFW so that the A380F can be tested on it, has there been any reaction from the German politicians regarding this apparent waste of money?


User currently offlineOsiris30 From Barbados, joined Sep 2006, 3192 posts, RR: 25
Reply 12, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11736 times:

Quoting PEET7G (Reply 9):
I still believe there is some sort of agreement behind the scenes, and that it was a decision made together with UPS, and as already discussed... a win-win situation for both.

If there is, that quote is certainly extremely unflattering for Airbus. I'm not sure what to make of this mess right now.



I don't care what you think of my opinion. It's my opinion, so have a nice day :)
User currently offlineThreepoint From Canada, joined Oct 2005, 2162 posts, RR: 9
Reply 13, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11668 times:

Reading the entire article provided above, it appears that UPS announced a postponement in their order last week. Did they? I don't know, but Airbus' position is that they are concentrating on the pax version in light of this UPS-induced delay.
It sounds like both sides are claiming the decision was made by the other party. Whatever, let's not vilify any side until it becomes more clear.



The nice thing about a mistake is the pleasure it gives others.
User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 51
Reply 14, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11620 times:

Quoting PEET7G (Reply 2):
Just wish playing the Lottery would be that easy...

I was thinking the same thing.

Quoting NYC777 (Reply 6):



Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 3):
There is a new development schedule for the freight version A380F, he said, adding that the company sees sales potential for 400 models of the A380 freight aircraft in the next 20 years.



Quoting NYC777 (Reply 6):
United Parcel Service Inc., Airbus's only remaining customer
for the plane, said the Airbus move took it by surprise.
''We've not made any decision,'' Mark Giuffre, a spokesman for
UPS's airline operations, said in an interview. UPS never asked for
a delay in the A380 freighter program, he said.
''Airbus has had problems in terms of delivering the aircraft
in the A380 program,'' he said. ''It has not been UPS asking for
delays in the program.'

A bit over optimistic I would say, at least at this point.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineDouwd20 From United States of America, joined May 2005, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11607 times:

Quoting Poitin (Reply 11):
Yes it does -- the 744 BCF

That's not much in terms of real competition.


User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 16, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11597 times:

Quoting PEET7G (Reply 9):
Could it be that the earlier comments from the Airbus pipeline, that UPS will delay it's order for 10 years was a plain decision from the side of Airbus?

That's how I've interpreted the situation. Airbus wanted the delay, not UPS.

Quoting PEET7G (Reply 9):
I find it hard to believe that this decision took UPS with surprise and that they had no knowledge of this coming.

UPS was informed, and they have been given the option to cancel based on the new delivery dates. With this announcement, we now know that there are in fact no delivery dates at all. A 5X cancellation is now a formality.



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31124 posts, RR: 85
Reply 17, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11572 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 3):
I've been reading about the 400 models of the freight version for the last 10 years. I wonder which 20 year period they are talking about? It's sounding more and more like a self-perpetuating mantra.

Well powerplant and structural improvements that would allow the A388F to lift more then 150t the same distance as the 747-8F with better efficiency would probably help sales a good bit.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 11):


Quoting Douwd20,reply=10:

This means the 747-8F has no competition for many years to come.

Yes it does -- the 744 BCF.

The 744BCF does not have the same flexibility and capability as the dedicated freighter model has. While I have no doubt 744BCF kit sales will increase, especially with 744P operators with cargo arms using 744Fs, the 748F should still see strong sales for many, many years to come.

Quoting Poitin (Reply 11):
Side issue: Given that the city of Hamburg has invested many hundreds of millions of Euros in the Airbus plant in Hamburg, not to mention the expansion of the run way at XFW so that the A380F can be tested on it, has there been any reaction from the German politicians regarding this apparent waste of money?

Perhaps getting a third A320 line (at the expense of TLS?) and the entire A320RS production quota has been deemed "sufficient compensation"?


User currently offlineKatekebo From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 704 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11556 times:

Quoting PEET7G (Reply 9):
Could this be true? Could it be that Airbus took decision without reconciling with UPS? Could it be that the earlier comments from the Airbus pipeline, that UPS will delay it's order for 10 years was a plain decision from the side of Airbus? I find it hard to believe that this decision took UPS with surprise and that they had no knowledge of this coming. If so... then the behaviour of Airbus is simply outrageous, and deserves every bad thing coming to them! I just can't believe it was so... this would be to much to get away with... No, this can not be true... NO ONE can get away with such business behaviour...

The reality is that Airbus situation is worse than what Airbus cheerleaders want to accept. Airbus is in cash-crunch. They don't have enough free cash to develop the A380F, the A350 and the A320E, all at the same time, so they have to delay something in order to concentrate their limited financial resources on the project with the highest NPV and strategic importance. If they dilute the limited amount of money over too many projects and consequently delay the A350, they will concede the entire widebody market to Boeing - their current products (A330 / A340) are simply not competitive enough against Boeing's offering (B787 / B777).

On top of the limited cash, Airbus is also facing human resources limitation - with 10,000 jobs going away there is no way their R&D and Engineering force won't suffer cuts, too. Airbus won't have enough engineers to develop A380F, A350 and A320E simultaneously. Giving up on the A380F won't harm them too much (espacially with only 10 orders left), but not concentrating 100% of their available resources on the A350 would be suicidal. Delaying (cancelling) A380F is no longer a matter of making a business choice, it's a matter of survival.


User currently offline777STL From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 3707 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11552 times:

Quoting Douwd20 (Reply 15):
That's not much in terms of real competition.

The cargo sector is typically much more receptive to used aircraft than the pax industry. E.G., FX and 5X and the MD11, FX and the 757, etc. Add to the fact that there's going to be a glut of used 744s on the market in the next 10 years or so, and I think the 744 BCF will do fine.



PHX based
User currently offlineUSAF336TFS From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 1445 posts, RR: 51
Reply 20, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11522 times:

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 18):
Delaying (cancelling) A380F is no longer a matter of making a business choice, it's a matter of survival.

Sadly, you're absolutely right. Airbus needs to use their available resources in much higher priority projects.



336th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 4th Fighter Wing, Seymour Johnson AFB
User currently offlineTeamAmerica From United States of America, joined Sep 2006, 1761 posts, RR: 23
Reply 21, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11523 times:

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 18):
Airbus is in cash-crunch. They don't have enough free cash to develop the A380F, the A350 and the A320E, all at the same time, so they have to delay something in order to concentrate their limited financial resources on the project with the highest NPV and strategic importance.

No, I don't see that EADS/Airbus is in that much of a bind. They have no customers for the A380F, hence there's no point in building the thing. Simple as that.



Failure is not an option; it's an outcome.
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31124 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 11501 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 18):
The reality is that Airbus situation is worse than what Airbus cheerleaders want to accept. Airbus is in cash-crunch. They don't have enough free cash to develop the A380F, the A350 and the A320E, all at the same time, so they have to delay something in order to concentrate their limited financial resources on the project with the highest NPV and strategic importance.

Yet even if Airbus was "cash flush", stopping work on the A388F due to such low sales would not be a bad idea. Many "Boeing Boosters" felt that Boeing halting work on the 748I when sales were non-existant and just going with the 748F was a good idea, so I don't think we should castigate "Airbus Aficionados" for offering the same, even if it is true the financial position of Airbus is worse then Boeing's.

Quote:
If they dilute the limited amount of money over too many projects and consequently delay the A350, they will concede the entire widebody market to Boeing - their current products (A330 / A340) are simply not competitive enough against Boeing's offering (B787 / B777).

I'm beginning to wonder if the design itself is the problem with the A350XWB and why it continues to be revised again and again and pushed back farther and farther.

And no matter how good the 777 and 787 are vis-a-vis the A340 and A330, Airbus will still sell those planes and do so at a profit, even if it means undercutting Boeing on price.

Quote:
On top of the limited cash, Airbus is also facing human resources limitation - with 10,000 jobs going away there is no way their R&D and Engineering force won't suffer cuts, too. Airbus won't have enough engineers to develop A380F, A350 and A320E simultaneously.

While I expect cuts in HR and direct management as facilities are closed or sold, nothing I have read has stated that Airbus intends to close any of their engineering centers. So I don't see where Airbus would be making cuts in their engineering ranks, unless they are people who are only qualified to work on the A388F program. And even then, I am sure Airbus or EADS can find something for them to do within the company.


User currently offlineRedFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4365 posts, RR: 28
Reply 23, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 11408 times:

Quoting Stitch (Reply 17):
Quoting RedFlyer (Reply 3):
I've been reading about the 400 models of the freight version for the last 10 years. I wonder which 20 year period they are talking about? It's sounding more and more like a self-perpetuating mantra.

Well powerplant and structural improvements that would allow the A388F to lift more then 150t the same distance as the 747-8F with better efficiency would probably help sales a good bit.

Like I said, I've been hearing the "market demand for 400 F models over the next 20 years" for the last 10 years. And that was long before any discussion of new engines, structural improvements, etc.

However, since you've brought it up, how much in improvements/efficiency gains could Airbus recognize with new engines (are we talking GenX here?) and theoretical structural improvements? If there was a market demand for 400 F models, would it not be worth it for Airbus to go down that path? I would think so. Boeing has shelled out ~$4 billion (the number I've seen thrown about) for development of the 8F/8i and between the two versions they only predicted sales of around 400. I would think if Airbus REALLY believed a market for 400 A380Fs existed, then they would surely spend the ~$1 billion to develop their freighter.

Quoting TeamAmerica (Reply 21):
They have no customers for the A380F, hence there's no point in building the thing. Simple as that.

Well, Boeing didn't have any customers either when they launched the 748F, but they built it anyway. The more appropriate point would be to say that Airbus had customers for the A380F, but then lost them all.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (7 years 7 months 4 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 11368 times:

Quoting Travelin man (Reply 5):
??? They are stopping the development of an aircraft for which they see a market of 400 aircraft in the next 20 years? Even though their biggest potential customers have either cancelled or "postponed" their orders by 10 years?

Do they really believe what they say?

It is amazing the kind if spin Airbus tries to put on this stuff. No small wonder they have a credibility problem.

Quoting Katekebo (Reply 18):
The reality is that Airbus situation is worse than what Airbus cheerleaders want to accept.

Right on.

Quoting Stitch (Reply 22):
I'm beginning to wonder if the design itself is the problem with the A350XWB and why it continues to be revised again and again and pushed back farther and farther.

I think it is more of the case where they are cannot match the performance they are seeking in term of the "30% less fuel burn and operating costs" vs the 777 they are shooting for. It's either that, or the 787 is far better than we know.



One Nation Under God
25 NYC777 : Funny, if Airbus has taken the 787 very very seriously in 2003 when the 787 was launched, they would not be in this situation today vis a vis the A35
26 Stitch : Well 10 years ago the A3XXF was going up against the 744F (and maybe the 744ERF) and compared much more favorably to that model then it does to the 7
27 NYC777 : Hence the "Me-Too" 787 produced by Airbus. If they do cointinue with the A350 don't be surprised if they go to a spun composite barrel vs teh fuselag
28 SEPilot : I think they totally underestimated the 787 and have been attempting to match it with half-baked hurry-up updates of the A330 and they keep getting t
29 Post contains images Dank : couple this with the fact that there is no way that anyone could have possibly anticipated the boondoggle that the delays in production would become.
30 NYC777 : Fine but 10 years ao the 744F hand teh nose door and I find it hard to believe that Airbus wasn't told that the freight carriers wanted a nose door o
31 Post contains images TeamAmerica : They may not have had signatures, but Boeing had Cargolux and Nippon Cargo lined up as customers when they made the launch announcement.
32 Dank : I think that the nose door issue is a wee bit overblown here. For some cargo carriers, it is a big deal, but for many, it is just the "given all othe
33 DAYflyer : The only way Airbus will be able to do this is to copy Boeing. I do not understand that Airbus cannot seem to understand that this (barrels, all elec
34 Stitch : Many 747F operators do not use the nose door, so I don't believe it is a "deal-maker/deal-breaker" for many carriers. Yet that would have required pu
35 SSTsomeday : Wow, the spin just boggles the mind, doesn't it? How can they be expected to be taken seriously with regard to the operating and economic specs they
36 USAF336TFS : I very rarely disagree with you, but having a wife who works for one of the biggest European Cargo airlines, I think the nose door is vitally importa
37 Pygmalion : UPS never said they wanted a 10 year slide... Airbus said UPS wanted a 10 year slide. Not the same thing at all.
38 TeamAmerica : I question whether there ever was any 10-year deferral at all. That statement was made by Airbus, not UPS. All we know with any certainty is that UPS
39 Dank : I don't buy this. The airlines could care less whether the systems are electric, a full barrel, etc. as long as the plane is cheaper to buy and fly (
40 Stitch : I admit I myself am only going from my own conversations with cargo pilots and staff. I fully understand it is not "rare", but it also does not seem
41 Thebry : This is moot. The majority of 747F flying are converted from passenger jets (and many more will be converted as the 747-8i comes online). None of the
42 Post contains images Stitch : 36 744BCF conversion kits have been sold (and most have not been installed) whereas 166 744 and 744ERFs have been built. So either IAI has been real
43 Dank : Can I ask why you quoted my post on this? I was saying that the nose-door requirement was overblown. cheers.
44 Dank : But I think you would have to add in the 747 classics, too (your numbers do not refute the original comment that "most 747F" are conversions. The que
45 TeamAmerica : It's standard. Oddly enough, the side loading door is optional.
46 RIXrat : Several months ago I went back to Seattle to visit a friend of mine who is a top-ranking Boeing design engineer. He told me that the original 7E7, vie
47 Post contains images TeamAmerica : I'd guess Boeing's "intelligence" came from reading A.Net.
48 Sangas : The first major A380 program delay was announced in June 2005, the 748 was formally launched in November 2005.
49 RedFlyer : Although formally launched in November, 2005, the 747-8 was in the news since early 2004.
50 Patroni : Are you sure about that? All 747-400F and 8F docs which I have on hand don't mention the possibility to order one without side cargo door. There are
51 Stitch : It would be helpful to know how many conversions of 747-200s and 747-300s have been done. IAI has done at least 38 742 conversions and Boeing has per
52 Mah584jr : Doesn't surprise me at all, especially after UPS's recent announcement. I'm not biased against airbus or boeing, but to me the whole A380 project is s
53 Dank : I think we got crossed up here. Sorry about that. I agree that in the future the conversions will be 744s not 747 classics. What I was getting at abo
54 Post contains images NoWorries : This entire Airbus/UPS dance has been so bizarre, it defies rational explanation -- could Airbus's motive simply have been to string UPS along until
55 XT6Wagon : Airbus asked the question:" How often do you use the nose door" Most of the freight companies said "little to none" They should have asked "how much
56 2wingtips : So, in summary, Airbus have just ceded the entire large freighter market to Boeing and can only compete with the 332F(which interestingly is of NO int
57 EBJ1248650 : Given that this order was still open, why in heaven's name would Airbus decide to stop development of the airplane? That's shooting themselves in the
58 B707Stu : It seems pretty clear what's happened. Airbus delayed the aircraft 2+ years which forced UPS to find something else. Rather than cancel, probably bec
59 A5XX : Maybe the recent 767F order, by UPS, left Airbus with a doubt that UPS would, in the end, effectively cancel the deal, just like FedEx did. Airbus wa
60 GeorgiaAME : What difference does that make? It may have been the taxpayer's money, but in a socialist society those funds "belong" to the government, to do with
61 MCIGuy : Airbus didn't have any choice. This isn't a face-saving measure, it's an arse-saving measure. Besides, I think it'll be good for them in other ways to
62 57AZ : Sounds like s 21st century re-enactment of the 367-80. Douglas got a rude surprise when they realized that the -80 was a jet transport and not a cont
63 XT6Wagon : not going to happen. Far too much money for far to little results. Timing will also mean that a A380"NG" would launch into a world of 748F paid off a
64 Post contains images Columba : I sure hope so and I believe the chances stand very good that we will see a 747-8F in LH Cargo livery !!
65 Post contains images KELPkid : The sad thing is...(please bear with me here), they should have knocked out the freighter version FIRST. The wiring issues that have delayed the pax v
66 XT6Wagon : Well, they have contracts to honor, and the frieghter version would have used resources vital to getting the passenger version out in any approximati
67 Joni : According to Le Monde, Airbus can now use the delivery slots pencilled for A380F deliveries to deliver the pax versions. I guess that saves them some
68 57AZ : Sad but probably true. Remember that the two most revolutionary jet airliners to date (the 707 and 747) both had the demands of cargo transport plann
69 Scouseflyer : I think that all of the wiring was screwed up not just the stuff related to the passenger cabin. My understanding is that the first production fuse s
70 Post contains links Sangas : Before the various delays, deferrals, and cancellations the first A380F assembled was to be MSN0037, which was presumably going to serve as the test
71 UPS Pilot : Dank, You are right on with this. The two largest cargo carriers, Fed Ex and UPS do not have one aircraft in fleet with a nose door. What a circus !!
72 XT6Wagon : You do know that UPS has new build 744F's on the way, and that 100% of those have nose doors. I'm actualy suprised that there were no new build 747 f
73 Post contains links Sangas : "Airbus is delaying A380 freighter" http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...erospace/2003596463_airbus020.html From Seattle P-I: http://seattlepi.nwsou
74 Post contains images UPS Pilot : When did that happen? There is also 3 744 SF SCD on the way with no nose door. Trust me the nose door is not an issue for UPS.
75 HB88 : Seems a slightly disingenuous comment given the 10 year deferral which has been reported recently. Anyway, I'm not surprised at all about this. If a
76 Post contains images MCIGuy : Forgive me, I'm no engineer, I just like to fly their products (I'm not an airline pilot though). Would it really be that expensive to re-engine the
77 Post contains images Stitch : Yes I am referring to the entire A350 program with my comments. Apologies for not being clearer. The Trent 900 has a 112" diameter fan while the Tren
78 LTBEWR : To me, Airbus had no real financial alternative but to suspend work on the A380F's. The demand for the F version has been made worse for a number of o
79 Post contains links Stitch : On an aside - UPS To Cancel A380 Order (by Airportplan Mar 2 2007 in Civil Aviation)
80 XT6Wagon : Basicly anytime you do ANYTHING outside of make some PowerPoint slides expect to drop a Billion before you are done. Thats not quite fair since alot
81 SSTsomeday : I wonder if the 380F cancellation (or perhaps "freezing of development" is a more appropriate way to put it) will exacerbate AIrbus' recently announce
82 Pygmalion : The premise here is quite wrong... UPS never defered anything. Airbus said that UPS wanted a deferral, not UPS. I think this was Airbus playing the P
83 AirTran717 : That is the very same reason Boeing ended production of the 717. Aside from AirTran, no one else was interested. Most, AirTran included, have begn lo
84 Scouseflyer : Except it is a commonly held beleif that UPS didn't really want the 389 in the first place and only ordered it so that they could cancel their massiv
85 Terryb99 : From Speednews: March 2: UPS has announced plan to cancel its order for 10 A380s later this year as it now understands that Airbus is diverting employ
86 RedFlyer : Unless sales of the pax plane take-off, I don't think it will happen. In business the typical procedure is to pour more money into an already profita
87 Post contains links TeamAmerica : I wasn't aware than any were actually built without the side door! You're probably correct that the side door is now standard (as it should be!) but
88 KC135TopBoom : In the last 10 years the B-747-400F/ERF has sold about 4X (about 100 sales) the number of units the A-380-800F did (27) before everyone started aband
89 AVinutso : I don't necessarily agree with that. We are talking huge amounts of deposits based on a delivery schedule originally planned by Airbus which did not
90 OldAeroGuy : Current 777F sales now stand at 56.
91 Stitch : Okay, I'm willing to admit that many airlines are not going to give Airbus a free-pass between the A380 and A350 issues, but if Airbus' credibility wa
92 Osiris30 : It's called necessity. You'll also note that these stunning sales aren't with ne aircraft families. Finally few customers were actually impacted by t
93 Pygmalion : Even new orders for existing jets are being impacted by the delays and cancellations. As has been stated in other threads, airlines are demanding new
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...
Eads Stock Plunges On A380 News! posted Wed Jun 14 2006 10:11:56 by Dhefty
A380 On "Eyesore Of The Month" Website posted Thu Feb 10 2005 20:23:16 by JetBlast
A380 On Front Page Of IHT-Jan 12 posted Wed Jan 12 2005 05:09:07 by AeroWesty
On The Horizon Of Aviation 'On-Duty' Time Limit? posted Fri Feb 23 2007 05:12:43 by Cha747
Update On Power8 (Sort Of) posted Fri Feb 16 2007 21:57:42 by GRIVely
EADS, Bnds & Others Selling Out Of ERJ posted Wed Jan 24 2007 20:21:46 by Pdpsol
Airbus Says UK May Not Get Some Work On A350 posted Wed Jan 17 2007 21:13:47 by BoomBoom
PBS Report On Virtual Rollout Of The 787 posted Wed Jan 10 2007 07:25:47 by BoomBoom
BA Flight 252 On The 5th Of Jan posted Sat Jan 6 2007 15:42:17 by Albird87
Porter On The Verge Of Overtaking Harmony!? posted Wed Jan 3 2007 20:47:09 by Connector4you