Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Gallois To McNerney - Don't Talk About A350  
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 11404 times:

M. Gallois appears quite sensitive to any comments by the competition WRT the A350XWB. In this article, by Dominic Gates, he publicly chides the Boeing CEO.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...logy/2003750119_a350gallois16.html

Quote:
When he returned in the afternoon to close the seminar, he said that in the car on the way over he'd read a report in Le Monde newspaper quoting Boeing Chief Jim McNerney as saying the A350 design specification is not yet solid.
Gallois did not conceal his irritation.
"I prefer to talk about my product," he said, "I don't like when my competitor is talking about my product."
"What Jim McNerney said is wrong," Gallois said. "It's completely unfair to say that."

The merits of his criticism notwithstanding, will he muzzle his chief salesman in return?

Edit: Here's another article on M. Gallois' public irritation.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/...ness/EU-FIN-France-Airbus-A350.php

Quote:
Boeing reclaimed the top sales spot in 2006, winning more orders than Airbus for the first time since 2000 after the introduction of the Dreamliner. It may reclaim the title of the world's largest plane maker — classed in terms of deliveries — next year when it starts shipping the 787. The A350 XWB won't be available until 2013.
In a clear change of tactics, Gallois claimed not to care.
"I don't think that our target is to sell more airplanes than Boeing," he told reporters. "Our target is to be the best company and not the biggest. I think that's a change from the past. I don't care if I have 45, 48 or 52 percent of the market."

Is this defensive posture a good thing heading into the airshow?

[Edited 2007-06-16 15:04:37]


"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
93 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 1, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 11326 times:

I get the impression that Gallois is a good honest bloke but somewhat out of his depth. The reverse of Harry Truman's famous comment, "A four-ulcer man in an eight-ulcer job."

What McNerney said - that "the A350 design specification is not yet solid" - is no more than the verifiable truth.

IMO Gallois shouldn't have responded at all. Leave alone cried 'Foul!".........

[Edited 2007-06-16 15:26:28]


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 11274 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 1):
What McNerney said - that "the A350 design specification is not yet solid" is no more than the verifiable truth.

IMO Gallois shouldn't have responded at all. Leave alone cried 'Foul!".........

My, my, the pot calling the kettle black. I would suggest Gallois review the many many comments Leahy and Airbus made about the 787 over the last few years.


User currently offlineAA1818 From Trinidad and Tobago, joined Feb 2006, 3435 posts, RR: 4
Reply 3, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 11256 times:

Gallios also seems to take offence to the comment saying only that it is untrue, but he doesn't qualify his disagreement, he should have said that the A350 is infact firm. Of course he can't say that, because the A350 is NOT solidly firm. He is definitely out of his depth and is being pushed up against a wall by a strong competitor and demanding customers!

Gallios can say he doesn't care about size etc, because Airbus is a state funded machine. They need not turn a profit, they need not do anything but exist.

Airbus is being outsold, might be outproduced and is certainly being trashed in terms of commanding a percentage of the marke value!

What do you expect Gallios to say when his firm is struggling? I do hope airbus get over some of their woes in the near future though and are able to deliver a quality A350 (even if it does take them 16 versions to get it right!)

AA1818



“The moment you doubt whether you can fly, you cease for ever to be able to do it.” J.M. Barrie (Peter Pan)
User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 4, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 11240 times:

Quoting Poitin (Reply 2):
My, my, the pot calling the kettle black. I would suggest Gallois review the many many comments Leahy and Airbus made about the 787 over the last few years.

I think he has been lately, IIRC, he's even contradicted Leahy a few times....Like his predecessor Streiff, Gallois seems to be "no-nonsense" kind of person....

What I find interesting however is even these guys read media publications (or are in tune with them to a certain extent)....I guess the media does have some sway after all.... spin 



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlinePoitin From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11166 times:

Quoting Jacobin777 (Reply 4):
I think he has been lately, IIRC, he's even contradicted Leahy a few times....Like his predecessor Streiff, Gallois seems to be "no-nonsense" kind of person....

What I find interesting however is even these guys read media publications (or are in tune with them to a certain extent)....I guess the media does have some sway after all.... spin

If Gallois is a no-nonsence kind of guy, let him fire Leahy before complaining about what others say.

And maybe they all read A.net as well Big grin


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30986 posts, RR: 86
Reply 6, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11074 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I just grabbed the paper off the porch and read the article.

Personally, I think it is important for Airbus to take a stand and move forward with determination on the A350. They've played around with it for some two years now, adapting many of the technologies that Leahy and Forgeard dismissed on the Sonic Cruiser/7E7/787.

Hedging their bets yet again just pushes more and more customers with A350 commitments to secure slots with Boeing for the 787, for even though Boeing is hitting some snags with building the 787, they are at least building the 787. As much an "advantage" the A350 has against the 787 by seeing what the Boeing product does first then matching or exceeding it, if the A350 never leaves the drawing board because it keeps changing, it won't matter. It's like if Boeing launched the MD-12 concept as a real plane in 2015 and it was better then the A380 in every way, but Airbus had already sold enough A380s to meet the demand for VLAs so nobody needed an MD-12, even if they wanted it.

And Gallois might be a pragmatist, noting that the A350 is coming to market years after the 787 has secured the balance of A332/767 replacement orders and the 77L/77W/77F have secured much of the expansion market, leaving it to fight with (most likely) HGW 787s for the 772/A333/A340 replacement market which will be large, but will still probably give Boeing the majority (55-65%) of the 200+ seat market going forward.


User currently offlineJacobin777 From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 14968 posts, RR: 59
Reply 7, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 11043 times:

Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):

If Gallois is a no-nonsence kind of guy, let him fire Leahy before complaining about what others say.

...bit hypocritical, true....but I think he's giving Leahy some slack right now given the precarious situation Airbus/EADS is in......I wouldn't be surprised Gallois hasn't given Leahy "a word or two" behind closed doors...

Quoting Poitin (Reply 5):
And maybe they all read A.net as well  biggrin 

Parent company EADS would be filing for bankruptcy within a couple of weeks.. biggrin 

...what's interesting is has been his consistency about market share rather than "selling planes on the cheap to win an order"...especially in lieu of the potential BA VLA order...



"Up the Irons!"
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 8, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10996 times:

Maybe another comment by Gallois deserves consideration:-

"I don't think that our target is to sell more airplanes than Boeing," he told reporters. "Our target is to be the best company and not the biggest. I think that's a change from the past. I don't care if I have 45, 48 or 52 percent of the market."

In terms of numbers of orders this year, Airbus (roughly 200 against 400) has only about 30% of the market. In terms of value, given that a high proportion of Airbus' sales are single-aisles while a high proportion of Boeing's are midsizes, the situation is even worse; Airbus probably has no more than 20%. Anything LIKE 45% is surely already out of Airbus' reach for years to come?

Which makes you wonder how much even Gallois knows (or recognises, in his own mind) about Airbus' TRUE situation?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineHamlet69 From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 2744 posts, RR: 58
Reply 9, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10988 times:

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 3):
Of course he can't say that, because the A350 is NOT solidly firm.

Just on a side note - I've heard thru the grapevine that Airbus is now talking about having two different wings (or at least modified) on the A350. One will be for the -800/-900, the other will be for the -1000 and potential -1100.

Regards,

Hamlet69  profile 



Honor the warriors, not the war.
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 10, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10963 times:

Thanks Hamlet69. Perhaps they'd better start calling them the A387 and the A377?  Smile


"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 30986 posts, RR: 86
Reply 11, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10887 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 9):
Just on a side note - I've heard thru the grapevine that Airbus is now talking about having two different wings (or at least modified) on the A350. One will be for the -800/-900, the other will be for the -1000 and potential -1100.

Interesting. I was of the opinion Boeing might do the same, developing a new wing for the HGW 787's to improve performance because the current wing seems optimized for MTOWS of around ~550,000lbs even though Boeing built in almost 100,000lbs of MTOW growth into the design (it is said that with strengthening, it can lift 640,000lbs).

Both the 787 and A350 wings had growth built-in, but perhaps the airlines are really pushing for more significant step-changes due to the expected life of these airframes (thanks to CFRP) that they want more "mission optimized" models?


User currently offlineJoni From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 12, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 10887 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 8):


In terms of numbers of orders this year, Airbus (roughly 200 against 400) has only about 30% of the market. In terms of value, given that a high proportion of Airbus' sales are single-aisles while a high proportion of Boeing's are midsizes, the situation is even worse; Airbus probably has no more than 20%. Anything LIKE 45% is surely already out of Airbus' reach for years to come?

Perhaps not "for years to come", as the A350XWB sales can pick up in the next years, and if the plane is better than the B787 (as they claim) then Airbus can in 2 years time (say) have once more an excellent position with the A320, A350XWB and A380.

Incidentally, his point about market share not being the #1 priority is what Boeing is saying as well.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 13, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10830 times:

Quoting Joni (Reply 12):
Airbus can in 2 years time (say) have once more an excellent position with the A320, A350XWB and A380.

Sorry, Joni. but no. The A320 is still a goer, yes, and maybe the A330 can hold its own for a time; but the A350 (whichever version) cannot contribute anything in terms of positive revenue until 2013 at the earliest; and we already know, from EADS' own forecasts, that the A380 will be making a loss on production until at least 2010.

I'm not saying that Airbus can't 'turn the corner' eventually. But it will take a lot longer than two years - more like six or seven. I'm just surprised that, from his comments, Gallois (of all people) simply doesn't seem to realise that.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 14, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10820 times:

Quoting Joni (Reply 12):
and if the plane is better than the B787 (as they claim)

There is no option here. It HAS to be better--at least to the current 787 offering. Period. Mr. Leahy is already on the record as saying a "me too" airplane won't cut it.



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10026 posts, RR: 96
Reply 15, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10729 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Hamlet69 (Reply 9):
Just on a side note - I've heard thru the grapevine that Airbus is now talking about having two different wings (or at least modified) on the A350. One will be for the -800/-900, the other will be for the -1000 and potential -1100.

FWIW there will be one or two of us who wouldn't be surprised by this......
In terms of wing area per tonne MTOW, the A3510 is pretty near to the B789, but appears to be slightly limited in span (the 789's aspect ratio is 10.4, the A3510's is 9.3).

The A359 appears slightly overwinged, and the A358 is most definitely overwinged, on current specs.

For me, ideally, the A358/9 should have a c. 380m2 wing on 64m span, and the A3510 its current 440m2, but on a 68m span (but this exceeds ICAO cat E..)

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 10):
Perhaps they'd better start calling them the A387 and the A377?

Duh? The 787 has THREE different wings in the family (already - notwithstanding any "HGW" possibilities) - you think Boeing should call these different families too?
Or are you suggesting that more than 1 wing is stupid?
Wait on while I ring Boeing - they might want to know.........

Regards


User currently offlineBizFlyer From Germany, joined Jul 2004, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10675 times:

All that is being said in this thread and others, doesn´t excite me really.

Airbus is at the ground now, but Boeing was before.

The whole airliners business is cyclic, both in terms of airline-business, and makers business.

As there are never two winners, the cyclic nature of the business refers also to who is ahead of the other.

So, in one sentence, all is normal and in some future we will see Airbus up and Boeing down and vice versa, it is just the nature of this business.

Kind regards,

BizFlyer



Stay belted as long as you can!
User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 17, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10650 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 15):
Duh? The 787 has THREE different wings in the family (already - notwithstanding any "HGW" possibilities) - you think Boeing should call these different families too?

Hi Astuteman - I take it 8th. June went well? Even though it was not a launch but just a 'rollout,' shipyards (like every OTHER bloody thing) have changed since my business days..........

I don't think there's much argument between us that Airbus are trying to compete with two aeroplanes (787 and 777) with a single model? The fact that they are now considering two wing designs instead of one, after all this time, surely suggests that they have (once AGAIN) backed the wrong horse?

In any case, on the topic, surely if Airbus hasn't yet settled the wing design, Gallois can have no complaints about McNerney saying that the A350 design isn't 'solid'?



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
User currently offlineLumberton From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 4708 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10622 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 17):
In any case, on the topic, surely if Airbus hasn't yet settled the wing design, Gallois can have no complaints about McNerney saying that the A350 design isn't 'solid'?

 checkmark  Good point. Is it or isn't it "firmed up"?



"When all is said and done, more will be said than done".
User currently offlineThebry From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 375 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10622 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Joni (Reply 12):
Incidentally, his point about market share not being the #1 priority is what Boeing is saying as well.

At last, both sides may be able to drop this "sales war" attitude and focus on the customer.

However, we have to define market share. If it's point of sale info (share of sales in a given year) then they've been neck and neck for several years. If it's "installed base" (each manufacturers share of units currently in use by customers) then Boeing is far and away the leader here (even without the MD aircraft thrown in).


User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10564 times:

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 1):
What McNerney said - that "the A350 design specification is not yet solid" - is no more than the verifiable truth.

IMO Gallois shouldn't have responded at all.

I agree, I was told many years ago: If someone takes the time and effort to refute something, it must be true.


User currently offlineLeskova From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 6075 posts, RR: 70
Reply 21, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10537 times:

Quoting Lumberton (Thread starter):
Is this defensive posture a good thing heading into the airshow?

Considering that most of the people criticising him on this thread have been calling for an Airbus CEO to present just exactly this kind of position, I can only find this whole discussion ironic at best...

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 1):
What McNerney said - that "the A350 design specification is not yet solid" - is no more than the verifiable truth.

Which Mr. McNerney, and you, would obviously know much better than Mr. Gallois...  Yeah sure

Quoting AA1818 (Reply 3):
Gallios can say he doesn't care about size etc, because Airbus is a state funded machine. They need not turn a profit, they need not do anything but exist.

Why does this nonsense keep popping up?



Smile - it confuses people!
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10026 posts, RR: 96
Reply 22, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 10537 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 17):
The fact that they are now considering two wing designs instead of one, after all this time, surely suggests that they have (once AGAIN) backed the wrong horse?

Once again, Boeing must have really stuffed up the 787 if the number of different wing configurations is a measure of "rightness".
The fact that they are now considering two different/modified wing designs suggests (to me), that they, like Boeing, recognise that there advantages to this, as well as disadvantages.
I'm struggling following a logic that implies that this is "good" for Boeing, but a "bad" thing when Airbus consider it.

And yes - the 8th June was easier to follow than this argument.
(Weather was better too....and at least we managed to beat the 787 to roll-out  Wink - it was touch and go at one time.... )

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 17):
In any case, on the topic, surely if Airbus hasn't yet settled the wing design, Gallois can have no complaints about McNerney saying that the A350 design isn't 'solid'?

Can't argue with this one at all.
Even Airbus acknowledge final system design freeze at mid-08.
There are obviously "levels" of solidity. IIRC the 787-9's wing was "modified" only about a year ago..........
Can't see why he's worried about it ..  Smile

Regards


User currently offlineBrendows From Norway, joined Apr 2006, 1020 posts, RR: 4
Reply 23, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10507 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 15):
Duh? The 787 has THREE different wings in the family

Wing designs? What do you exactly mean here? Yes, there are three models and three different wing spans, but the difference is not in the wing design itself, but the length and shape of the wing extensions. If you remove the wing extensions, the wings should be the same IIRC, except from some structural strengthening the higher TOW variants need.


User currently offlineNAV20 From Australia, joined Nov 2003, 9909 posts, RR: 35
Reply 24, posted (7 years 3 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 10467 times:

Quoting Astuteman (Reply 23):
I'm struggling following a logic that implies that this is "good" for Boeing, but a "bad" thing when Airbus consider it.

Putting it as simply as I can, Astuteman, the difference is that Boeing took the decision about 2003 and Airbus (if Hamlet69 is right) are only just getting around to taking it now........

Hope you get 'Astute' in the water soon. I saw a launch once (Daring Class Destroyer) and it remains one of the most impressive things I've ever seen.



"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
25 Aminobwana : GALLOIS is an insider charged to correct the mess which he helped to create from his position of coCEO at EADS. In crass opposition the the fired Chr
26 Astuteman : Wing designs? I said Wing configurations The 787-3 has a 52m wingspan. The 787-8 has a 60m wingspan The 787-9 has a 62m wingspan. And these differenc
27 Post contains images Jacobin777 : ...there is no logic...its A.net.... ...where is the "humiliation"? Streiff stepped down because of the "humiliations".....Gallois is still moving fo
28 Post contains images Dank : IIRC, didn't Boeing change maybe a root extension within the last year on the -9 to enhance their -10 offering (originally it was going to share the
29 Poitin : Since they just changed the forward cabin and front landing gear, and reorganized the mains, I would say that the A350 is a design in progress. Even
30 Davescj : While I'm not so certain it will take 16 versions...perhaps only 5 or six more.....The reality is they can't wait that long to produce a product. It
31 Post contains links Aminobwana : BillReid wrote under another topic, quoting from http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070616/france_airbus_a350.html?.v=1 that M. Gallois said: "When we have custo
32 Aminobwana : Do you think its not a humiliation to be co-CEO of EADS, member of the board, discuss his draft of the plan with his colleages, annouce repeatedly th
33 Zeke : I have heard similar, airlines would be interested in the "1100" with the existing wing as a regional 773 (non ER) replacement. I suspect the bigger
34 Post contains links Jacobin777 : ...while one doesn't see it to certain extent, it does happen..even if the Board "refuses" his plan one day before the announced date, he certainly h
35 AvObserver : While I think Gallois is overly sensitive as his snap at McNerney (is the pressure at Airbus getting to him?), I actually admire his above statement.
36 Post contains links Poitin : I think it is far more serious than Gallois loosing just his temper, he is loosing his grip on reality. In http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...log
37 Slz396 : Seems some ideas are very hard to put to rest once they catch on with the press. A simple look at the planned production of both A and B should have
38 MD-90 : That is definately a change from the past. I remember Airbus execs making comments that sounded like they were pretty excited about being the biggest
39 Beaucaire : If Airbus sells more than 250-300 A350's within the next twelve months,he's obliged to follow -otherwise he's leaving the market for that aircraft to
40 XT6Wagon : Not really, though I've seen writing that seems to indicate the 787-9 wing is changed alot more than just different wingtips. How much more I don't k
41 Aminobwana : Nobody doubt that he has the needed political skills to ran a French state company as SNCF and combine sound administration with a "popular touch". B
42 Stitch : Udvar-Hazy has to think beyond just the first customer for any plane ILFC buys. Airline A may want to lease the A350 for a decade because it's availab
43 Post contains images Halls120 : McNerney is "unfair?" Wow. After the years of Leahy badmouthing his competition early and often, the new head of Airbus now takes offense at his comp
44 Justloveplanes : This may be McNerney "baiting" Airbus to go public with the firmed A350 specs as much as they are. If JM and RT keep the pressure up on the PR front,
45 Joni : Here we were discussing orders, not deliveries.
46 Post contains images SEPilot : I elaborated on this on another thread; my take is that Airbus management has set performance goals for the A350 based on what they feel they need to
47 Glideslope : He hit's the nail on the head. What the problem? It's the same nail that was hit 6m ago, and 6m from now. There is no hope. MM
48 Post contains links and images Jacobin777 : ...I agree, however even though Gallois hasn't been in this kind of situation before, I think his knowledge and experience should definitely give him
49 AirSpare : PARIS — Airbus Chief Louis Gallois said Friday he will resist pressure from his largest customer to revamp yet again plans for the company's crucial
50 Aminobwana : I am sorry, Jacobin777, to be so picky. I really do not see what part of power 8 was already enforced (no firing nor attrition company's own and cont
51 Post contains images 7cubed : I agree with you on this. I read the article and didn't quite get Gallois' response. Mcnerney spoke the truth...Gallois needs to get his house in ord
52 Post contains images Manni : So if Airbus has 30% with 200 sold aircraft and Boeing has 400 sold aircraft, were does the remaining 10% goes? Or do you make that roughly 70% for B
53 Post contains links Stitch : Looks like Airbus is confident with what they have chosen to go forward with on the A350 - http://in.today.reuters.com/news/new...NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_Ind
54 NAV20 : Dank, with respect, speculation as to market 'segments' is not required. My phrase was 'compete with two aeroplanes.' There ARE two different aeropla
55 OldAeroGuy : Since Boeing has increased wing area and span as MTOW has increased from the 783 thru 789, they have been trying to match wing size to airplane paylo
56 Post contains images Iwok : So it he says the 350 specification is not firmed up this is called "kicking a beating kid while its down." Sounds more to me like more of the old Ai
57 Post contains links Azhobo : I am not sure this is true. I know both will be delivering more aircraft in the next few years. And it is likely A will edge out B in 2007. But start
58 Azhobo : It sounded like McNerney was far from kicking airbus 'when it is down' (your words not his). It sounds to me he was more than a gentleman in his comm
59 Post contains images AutoThrust : Maybe for lower costs and reduced complexity of the program = less risk more time for other things. I guess they dont expect to sell to much A358 the
60 Post contains images Astuteman : See my reply at post #26..... It is? You guys SO nearly had me convinced otherwise........... Revenue based R+D spend directly affect the bottom line
61 Zeke : What makes it too large apart from your perception ?
62 Post contains images NAV20 : Really, Manni, this gets a little tiresome.... The operative word in my post was 'roughly.' However, if you want absolute precision, Hamlet69 shows n
63 Poitin : Just because someone wants to lease a plane from ILFC does not mean that Steve is going to do it. You have to look at the total cost of ownership whe
64 BigJKU : I don't see anyone who criticized Airbus for considering two different wing sizes so I am a bit baffled by the defensive stance. On the contrary ever
65 Post contains images 7cubed : Mc Nerney, Bell, Carson... The top brass at Boeing has went out of their way to not rub salt in A's wounds. I've read countless interview's where the
66 Bringiton : Well , the sales department has all the right to compare figures between there aircrafts and there competitors , after all that is there prime concer
67 Aminobwana : Point well taken !! I should have written; " Airbus should not be a state monopoly as SNCF, but a commercial company" I am not sure what you mean by
68 Stitch : Very good point. The 787-11 will be cheaper to design, build, own, and operate compared to Y3 and will be available earlier. And it will offer excell
69 Post contains images Jacobin777 : .....I'm not surprised we don't know where the cost savings of of Power8 have been implemented...I'm sure we will certainly hear of the larger implem
70 Joni : Overreacted? What he said was that he prefers to talk about his product instead of having the competition do it. This is obviously true since he'll l
71 Gbfra : There is nothing new in Gallois' statement. I remember a lunch with former Airbus-CEO Gustav Humbert about 18 months ago when he clearly said that ma
72 BigJKU : I think the main argument for both the 787-10 and the 787-11 in the near term is that they will probably offer lower CASM than any Y-3, provided it i
73 Post contains images Poitin : Whatever happened to all those "WE"RE NUMBER ONE!" statements we all heard from Toulouse a couple years ago? Now they they aren't, suddenly it isn't
74 Post contains images NAV20 : Of course, Humbert got fired (IMO unfairly) shortly afterwards. Mind you, it's just as well that Airbus management (past and present) doesn't conside
75 Aminobwana : Lets see the facts: 1) Boeing has no interest to put a 787-11 on the market as long as the A350-1000/1100 remains widely undefined both technically a
76 Poitin : Boeing does have an interest in the 787-11, but you are right, they have no reason to do anything until they find out what the competition is going t
77 Post contains links and images Aminobwana : Partially !! The continuing undefinition of the A350, the wishful thinking statements of John Leahy (he is responsible for what this guy does), the u
78 Post contains images Manni : My fault. I should have checked and corrected the numbers you provided in your post before making the conclusion that 200 out of 600 is more then 30%
79 Azhobo : I think yuur statement says it about right on the commitments issue. That should just about complete that portion of this topic... ok maybe not. HOBO
80 Wolbo : You really are taking your Boeing fanboyism into the realms of the surreal if you call the Y3 LESS of an paper aircraft than the A350XWB despite the
81 Aminobwana : Lets see: The A350XWB is on offer: yes, but very major potential customer complain that several major specs are not defined.(The same being stated by
82 Aminobwana : Of course, if there are no open questions as in the case of the A350, normally a commitment is followe short term by a firm order. But this question
83 Atmx2000 : Huh? Kingfisher never signed anything with Boeing for widebody aircraft.
84 Post contains images Poitin : This is true, and of the 3800 of them that became firm, real honest-to-god orders, the vast majority were confirmed in six months. Thus if the order
85 Astuteman : The discussion was prompted by this interplay... Perhaps NAV20 wasn't criticising Airbus...........perhaps. His follow up comments indicate otherwise
86 Post contains images Dank : Every plane competes with multiple models (even models that don't match up directly). Even the 787 looks to be competing with a good chunk of the 777
87 Post contains links OldAeroGuy : The A350XWB wing area issue was discussed in some detail in this thread: A350 Wing Area (by WingedMigrator May 6 2007 in Tech Ops) And it's not just
88 NYC777 : Does this mean that no one in Airbus, especially loud mouth Leahy is going to talk about the 787?
89 Manni : No they didn't. One of his shareholders tried to safeguard delivery positions by placing a deposit which he eventually got back when the deadline exp
90 Post contains images Poitin : You mean that the Launch Customer order was false? Oh, I never. It was a firm order, and on the books for years. Everyone thought they would cancel,
91 Post contains links Manni : It wasn't. Here's an article on the Primaris 787 comitment. http://archives.seattletimes.nwsourc...ing06&date=20060706&query=primaris Separately, Boe
92 Post contains links NAV20 : According to James Wallace Qatar did in fact sign the order, but (presumably to save them embarrassment) it is still shown only on Boeing's 'Unidenti
93 Post contains links Keesje : Boeing (BA.N: Quote, Profile , Research) has accused Airbus (EAD.PA: Quote, Profile , Research) of touting an incomplete design to airlines in its bi
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...
Talk About Taking Your Time To Do Something.... posted Thu Dec 15 2005 02:38:23 by Alberchico
UA 767's To Hawaii (Don't Worry, Not About PTV's) posted Tue Jul 30 2002 00:46:37 by US A333 PIT
GA To Operate 763s? What About The A330s? posted Fri Sep 29 2006 20:51:25 by Mandala499
AFX: Airbus To Build Additional Model Of A350 posted Mon Aug 28 2006 09:35:21 by SFORunner
Comments on this article about A350 Design posted Wed Jun 14 2006 21:24:16 by AeroPiggot
Last-Ditch Bid To Save SQ Order For A350 posted Mon May 8 2006 12:36:12 by Leelaw
Watching And Listening To This. Don't Ya Wish posted Wed Apr 19 2006 20:48:41 by Beertrucker
Official: Aribus Is To Adopt A380 Cockpit For A350 posted Thu Mar 30 2006 17:32:54 by AirA380
China To Take Part In Airbus A350 Design And Mfg posted Mon Feb 20 2006 01:57:51 by Lumberton
BMW To Design Parts Of Airbus A350 Model posted Fri Jan 6 2006 01:34:41 by SFORunner