Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Randy Tinseth Takes A Dig At The A340  
User currently offlineNYC777 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 5802 posts, RR: 47
Posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18528 times:

Randy's Blog...Randy Tinseth took a parting shot at the A340....

http://boeingblogs.com/randy/archives/2011/11/goodbye_to_you.html


That which does not kill me makes me stronger.
137 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlineKPDX From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 2776 posts, RR: 2
Reply 1, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18498 times:

I realize it's partially his job to talk trash and hype things, but I wish the guy would STFU. Take the high road, and do more to help Boeing improve it's current state.   


View my aviation videos on Youtube by searching for zildjiandrummr12
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3509 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18436 times:

Quoting KPDX (Reply 1):
I realize it's partially his job to talk trash and hype things, but I wish the guy would STFU. Take the high road, and do more to help Boeing improve it's current state.

Neither side is exactly known for "taking the high road" when it comes to publicity. The A340 ads mentioned in the post are an example of Airbus doing the exact same thing. For that matter, rivals in pretty much every industry imaginable are known to do this from time to time--I don't see why it's a big deal if the heavy hitters in aerospace do the same.



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineredflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 3, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18430 times:

Totally tasteless and from a marketing standpoint a glaring lack of professionalism. You don't sell your wares by trashing your opponent. He would have done far better if he had made scant reference to the end of the A340 line by talking up the 777 and what a huge success it turned out to be. It could have been as simple as "With Airbus shuttering the A340 line, Boeing's gamble on the 777 has proven to be the right one." And then he could have gone on and talked up the 777 and all of its capabilities and successes. Instead he takes shots at Airbus' A340 campaign history in what seems to be a lot of bitter blood and a personal vendetta.

I would have expected more from someone so senior at Boeing and so far above the radar. Especially since Boeing hasn't exactly made perfect and fault-free steps lately.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineBoeingGuy From United States of America, joined Dec 2010, 3258 posts, RR: 7
Reply 4, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18355 times:

Yeah, several years ago I was told that Airbus was pulling the same scare tactics with a customer in a 777 vs A340 sales campaign, as noted in Randy's blog. You know, the 777 would fall out the sky into the ocean because it has 2 engines. An A340 would be safer. The customer supposedly said, "Really, than what's the A350 all about?" Airbus supposedly said, "Oh gee, uh um um....well that's not for you...".

The 777-300ER won the sales campaign, and they probably find it to be the best airplane in their fleet just like many airlines do.

CO was furious too. IIRC correctly, they wrote a letter to Airbus stating how offended they were. Something about while they don't have Airbus airplanes in their fleet now, you can bet they never will as long as Airbus keeps that B.S. scare tactics up. IIRC, Airbus wisely and quickly canned that advertising campaign.

The safety record of the 777, 767 and 757 on ETOPS routes speaks for itself. Flawless. In fact of those three models, there has only ever been one fatal accident overall among them in 30 years due to the fault of the airplane, and that was rapidly corrected (Lauda 767 thrust reverser incident out of BKK).

In the Ethics training that we get, we are directed to never degrade the competitor's products, especially not with customers. I assume that goes all the way up to the top Executives. (Note, I'm commenting on the competitor's previous tactics, not the airplanes).


User currently offlinebennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7809 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18269 times:

Just another salesman, what do you expect.

Cmon Randy, tell us about the B747-500, (I think that was the B747-400 stretch), how about the Sonic Cruiser, how about the B787 being how much delayed.

It is all about taking a poke and hoping that no one will ask the ackward questions about your own products.

A vs B, (not a lot between them).

How about telling it how it is.

A and B both build great planes, sometimes A has the edge, sometimes B does. Sometimes it depends on commonality or exactly what your requirements are, (range, load, cargo etc).


User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5786 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 18196 times:

Quoting bennett123 (Reply 5):
A and B both build great planes, sometimes A has the edge, sometimes B does. Sometimes it depends on commonality or exactly what your requirements are, (range, load, cargo etc).

  
Spot on!

If only members of this site would also heed this sometimes.  

Tugg



I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
User currently offlineAirbusA6 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2005, 2037 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 18025 times:

Cheap and nasty comments, that have no affect on the opposition, but make the person saying them look small.

By all means, sing the praise of the 777, advertise its great success and strong sales. And hope nobody mentions the 7late7 and 748i fiascos.



it's the bus to stansted (now renamed national express a4 to ruin my username)
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 18012 times:

Quoting redflyer (Reply 3):
Totally tasteless and from a marketing standpoint a glaring lack of professionalism. You don't sell your wares by trashing your opponent.

"I'm a Mac, and I'm a PC..."

Apple became the most valuable public company in the world and part of their strategy was trashing competing products in comparison to their own.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 17992 times:

I read everyone's response here before reading the blog post and I have to say, the responses are much harsher than the words Randy used.

Sure, you can interpret his tone if you'd like, but there's not a ton in there he didn't say that isn't fact. The A340 failed to produce the sales Airbus hoped. It also failed to be a competitive machine on the cost side when compared to the 777, and thus, airlines are dumping them as fast as they can. Airbus also proved itself wrong that 4 engines are better just by looking at their A330 sales success and now moving on to the A350.

I don't see why everyone is fuming over what he has said. Yes, he's a VP, but this is a blog which carries a little different tone than does an official press release. The fact of the matter is, Airbus tried hard to sell the A340 based on what could be considered questioning the safety of 2 engine aircraft and they failed. Not only that, but they got into the 2 engine aircraft game with the A350. I don't see what the fuss is about.


User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31420 posts, RR: 85
Reply 10, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 17968 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Trash talking is just part of the game and each side's loyalists will see their side as "playing clean" and other as "playing dirty". That, also, is part of the game.

Samsung's latest ad for the Galaxy smartphone takes shots at Apple iPhone fans for standing in line for their phone. Android fans laugh at how "sheeplike" iPhone fans are, while iPhone fans retort that nobody waits in line for an Android phone.

[Edited 2011-11-28 16:31:19]

User currently offlineneutronstar73 From United States of America, joined Mar 2011, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 17898 times:

I see nothing wrong with his blog post. II think it is part of the game. I thought the same when Airbus had the 4 Engines 4 Long haul ads.....although I thought they were a bit odd considering they had an A330 flying all over the oceans at the time......

It's just two companies (unofficially in Boeing's case...officially in Airbus' case) taking swipes at each other. No big deal. You expect them to say "Please! Buy our competitor's aircraft!" ???


User currently offlinefrmrCapCadet From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1743 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 17664 times:

I don't think Boeing ever did anything about its competition as cynical, lying, and dishonest as Airbus and the alleged great safety of 4 engines as opposed to 2.

ps - now if your are talking about cynical, lying and dishonest lobbying in the US Boeing takes the cake.



Buffet: the airline business...has eaten up capital...like..no other (business)
User currently offlineirshava From Ukraine, joined Oct 2011, 249 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 17584 times:

What do you honestly expect him to say? "Look at how great this machine is, its a shame to let it go"? It's only natural (being a Boeing worker) for him to point out the "flaws" of the program and how incompetent the design was. I also love how he pointed out figures while (although just coming out) the 747-8i has only 36.... and I honestly doubt its going to go over 150 (and even that is pushing it way too far - for the passenger version I mean)

I wonder why he doesn't want to mention that...



“If you were born without wings, do nothing to prevent them from growing.”
User currently offlineredflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 4376 posts, RR: 28
Reply 14, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 17549 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 8):
Apple became the most valuable public company in the world and part of their strategy was trashing competing products in comparison to their own.

Apple parodied PC in their ads and it was done in good humor. Big difference. Now, if Apple took out an ad and porked the PC in a matter-of-fact manner as Randy did to Airbus, it would come across as tasteless and would certainly not have had the affect it did. But, let's for the sake of argument say that Randy's article and Apple's ad are one-and-the-same - Randy's article comes across as downright boorish in my opinion.

Boeing's marketing folks need to stick to what works: touting the great airplanes that Boeing makes. And inasmuch as Airbus did the same with their "4 engines 4 long haul" and "4 engines for safety" campaigns, I think Boeing taking the high road would portend far better in this instance. And I doubt Airbus will ever play that card again anyway.



My other home is a Piper Cherokee 180C
User currently offlineikramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21583 posts, RR: 59
Reply 15, posted (3 years 3 weeks 3 days ago) and read 17504 times:

Quoting redflyer (Reply 14):
Apple parodied PC in their ads and it was done in good humor. Big difference. Now, if Apple took out an ad and porked the PC in a matter-of-fact manner as Randy did to Airbus, it would come across as tasteless and would certainly not have had the affect it did.

You didn't watch all the ads, or read all of the Apple copy then. Because they did that sort of thing.



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15833 posts, RR: 27
Reply 16, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 17469 times:

Quoting redflyer (Reply 3):
"With Airbus shuttering the A340 line, Boeing's gamble on the 777 has proven to be the right one."

Randy blows a ton of smoke at people who don't know any better, but with this point he is absolutely right. Boeing took a huge gamble on ETOPS and it came up aces. A poorly timed crash in the 1990s or even just even more excessive government regulation and the landscape could look a lot different. The MD-11 succumbed a lot earlier, due to its inability to deliver. Airbus did better, since the A340 was at least competitive for a significant period of time and they had the A330 to fall back on (which Randy conveniently forgot to mention).

By the way, is "throwing in the towel" the new euphemism for innovating? Boeing "threw in the towel" on props and launched the 707. Apple "threw in the towel" and started making iPods, etc.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlineUALWN From Andorra, joined Jun 2009, 2973 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 23 hours ago) and read 17362 times:

Quoting ikramerica (Reply 8):
Apple became the most valuable public company in the world and part of their strategy was trashing competing products in comparison to their own.

In that case, deservedly...

Quoting hatbutton (Reply 9):
The A340 failed to produce the sales Airbus hoped. It also failed to be a competitive machine on the cost side when compared to the 777, and thus, airlines are dumping them as fast as they can.

Are they? Who? LH? IB? SA? LX? LA? VS? TP? EY?



AT7/111/146/Avro/CRJ/CR9/EMB/ERJ/E75/F50/100/L15/DC9/D10/M8X/717/727/737/747/757/767/777/AB6/310/319/320/321/330/340/380
User currently offlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5793 posts, RR: 28
Reply 18, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17214 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 17):
Are they? Who? LH? IB? SA? LX? LA? VS? TP? EY?

I'm guessing he's referring to the hundreds of 787's and A350's that were ordered, partly as replacements for A340's.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8769 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17155 times:

"Only" 375 widebody quads? Only? This guy must think himself pretty large to say that. Hmmm. How is the 747 selling?

User currently onlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31420 posts, RR: 85
Reply 20, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17091 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Flighty (Reply 19):
"Only" 375 widebody quads? Only? This guy must think himself pretty large to say that. Hmmm. How is the 747 selling?

Since Randy seems to be referring to total orders for all models, that would be 1524 and climbing.

Now if you want to artificially parse the reporting criteria to make some kind of point...  Silly

[Edited 2011-11-28 19:33:23]

User currently offlinepolot From United States of America, joined Jul 2011, 2366 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17087 times:

Quoting Flighty (Reply 19):
"Only" 375 widebody quads? Only? This guy must think himself pretty large to say that. Hmmm. How is the 747 selling?

Since 1987? 760 orders.


User currently offlinewn700driver From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17057 times:

Quoting redflyer (Reply 3):
as "With Airbus shuttering the A340 line, Boeing's gamble on the 777 has proven to be the right one." And then he could have gone on and talked up the 777 and all of its capabilities and successes.

Perhaps, but you would never want to refer to your own product as a "gamble", regardless of the eventual success.


User currently offlinehatbutton From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 1500 posts, RR: 14
Reply 23, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17042 times:

Quoting UALWN (Reply 17):

Are they? Who? LH? IB? SA? LX? LA? VS? TP? EY?

TG will retire all 10 of their A340s by 2017. I believe they received their first back in 2005 so many of these aircraft won't yet be 10 years old.

http://www.flightglobal.com/news/art...rcraft-over-next-six-years-359423/

IB says they will start retiring their 19 A340-300s once they start receiving A330s in 2015.

http://web02.aviationweek.com/aw/mst...line=Upgrading%20Widebody%20Cabins

VS is getting rid of their 5 A340-300s starting in 2013.

EK will phase out all 8 of their A340-300s in 2012.

QR will phase out their 4 A340-600s in the next few years

http://www.ameinfo.com/281920.html

SA is in the process of removing 5 A340-200s.

AC dropped the last of their 15 A340s back in 2008.

LA will retire their 5 A340s in 2016 when they get 787s.

The only models that seem to be kept for now are the -500s for their range and the -600s because the seating capacity probably makes up for some of the higher costs. These are just some examples of airlines who have made plans to retire these planes long before the end of their service life.


User currently offlineCXB77L From Australia, joined Feb 2009, 2694 posts, RR: 5
Reply 24, posted (3 years 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 17028 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
CHAT OPERATOR

Quoting Flighty (Reply 19):
"Only" 375 widebody quads? Only? This guy must think himself pretty large to say that. Hmmm. How is the 747 selling?

The 747 has sold over 1500 and counting.

Even if you were only to take into account the orders for the 747 from 1987 onwards - from when the A340 was first offered for sale - you still have 763 to 375.



Boeing 777 fanboy
25 StuckInCA : Sigh. 4 engines better than 2?
26 jetblueguy22 : I really don't think he bashed them that bad. I mean obviously he is going to hype up his own aircraft. No point in saying well the A340 does this thi
27 MoltenRock : Agreed. As someone who is involved in sales and marketing daily, I never, ever, trash my competition. If you feel compelled to trash your competition
28 polot : It should also be noted, before anyone goes down that path, that the A340 only out delivered the 747 for 6 years. 2003-2006 and 2009-2010 (and in 201
29 Confuscius : That's a lot! Another interesting stat is 777 v. 3 and 4 engine non-VLA widebodies. 777 - 1,295 (orders) A340/DC-10/MD-11/L-1011 - 1,270 (delivered)[
30 dfambro : Not cool Randy. Pretty pointless to be complaining, again, about almost decade old marketing of a plane that was only modestly successful. Of all the
31 TravellerPlus : I disagree. I regularly fly the world's most isolated routes from Australia/New Zealand to Africa or South America. I am flying over oceans just like
32 jetblueguy22 : My interpretation of the ad was more that it was safer to fly the 4 engined A340 than th3 2 engined 777. Though aren't ETOPS rules changing soon to i
33 Post contains images Superfly : Is the IL-86 and IL-96 included in that count?
34 Post contains images CXB77L : A340 is narrower than the 777. If regulations permitted the operation of twins below 72 degrees latitude, I'd be willing to fly a 777 on those routes
35 Mir : Randy, naturally, neglects to mention the 330 side of the 330/340 program, which has been beating the pants off of every competing product that Boeing
36 AngMoh : And some airlines (like SQ) are starting to replace their 777s so anyone can give examples which suit them. Planes get replaced all the time - be hap
37 neutronstar73 : This "Airbus is wider than Boeing" argument started by MoltenRock and perpetuated is clearly erroneous. This is getting funny........ From SeatGuru:
38 hatbutton : Yes but it was Airbus's insistence that 4 was better than 2 that caused the response. Airbus is also guilty of excluding the A330 in their advertisem
39 Mir : Well, now you're getting into airline-specific seat layouts. Some might choose to give more room to the seats, others might choose to make the aisles
40 redflyer : I did. And no they didn't.
41 hatbutton : I'm not just giving examples which suit me. Most of these airlines have indicated they are retiring them because the economics don't work out compare
42 Mir : No, because they were designed together, and meant from the very beginning to be two members of the same family. You can't say the same about the 767
43 hatbutton : Yeah I understand, but I don't think that matters and I don't think you can claim that means Airbus "beat the pants" off of any product Boeing offere
44 neutronstar73 : I don't quite understand what your point is here. That statement is an exercise in contradictions. You can't say "airline specific seat layouts" that
45 Flighty : *facepalm* Was using a present tense, present-decade even, so yeah... sorry it was so "confusing." The A340 was a success. Not a smash, but it's a be
46 Mir : It very much does. You can't compare one aircraft program to half of an aircraft program and call it a fair comparison. The 330-200 very much outclas
47 zeke : Actually that just just muddies the water further. There are three seat measurements used in industry, seat back, seat bottom, and the width between
48 AngMoh : IL-96 Dassault Mercure and a long list of other planes. On a side note, I have seen the Cubana IL-96 and it looks interesting, a bit like a pregnant
49 BMI727 : The MD-11 most definitely does belong on a failures list. Talk about a day late and a dollar short.
50 tsugambler : Sorry, but the interior width of an aircraft is its interior width, regardless of what seats an airline chooses to install. In English, you can't say
51 tsugambler : The thing is, it didn't have to be... that's what's sad. Still, even with its flaws, it could have been a greater sales success if Boeing had decided
52 Post contains images CXB77L : Therein lies the issue. You can't make a blanket statement regarding seat width, because it is dependent entirely on what the airline chooses to inst
53 flyglobal : Coming back to Randy. While I don't think his comments are completely off, it wouldn't have been my style. I would have rather preferred he would have
54 UALWN : And the 767, and the 747, and the 747 and what not... You said: I still fail to see the evidence they are dumping them (now) faster than they are dum
55 Post contains images EPA001 : Probably the statement about "dumping them" was and is a gross exaggeration of the truth. Most A340's (probably > 95% of them) will serve their ec
56 Jack : If I was Airbus, I would be very happy with a VP of my closest competitor focusing on the A340 and not on getting the 787 out of the door or improving
57 BrouAviation : Well, isn't that the point he is actually making?! Exactly, and a lot of people turned their backs on them because of exactly that. You forget that A
58 CXB77L : First, the subject of Randy's blog is Airbus' advertisement of 4 engine "safety" for the A340. For that reason, the A330 should be excluded. If Airbu
59 koreana380 : It sounds like Mr Tinseth has some training to catch-up on...
60 UALWN : The 340s are (were) produced in the same line as the 330s. I believe this is new. If I'm not mistaken, before the latest revamp of Airbus's web site,
61 CXB77L : My apologies, I worded that badly. Let me rephrase. Airbus are not terminating production of the A330. They're terminating production of the A340. Th
62 ebbUK : Agreed. Randy can say what he wants about the A340, Boeing beat it hands down. Moving on...
63 Post contains images frigatebird : Sigh. He really seems to have taken Airbus' 4 engines marketing campaign a bit too personally. Of course, it's his opinion only and on his blog, but i
64 breiz : The most interesting for me is that Boeing has carefully archived all Airbus publicity, even from a time they regarded Airbus as no real competition.
65 aviasian : I think we should just lighten up ... it is always funny when Airbus takes a dig at Boeing and when Boeing returns the favour. That is what they do an
66 AirbusA6 : Looking at the comparative sales figures, the clear advantage to the 777 has only been with the stretched 300ER variant, especially as the modeld don'
67 neutronstar73 : You are being deliberately diffuse. As i said earlier, you can't say, as MoltenRock is prone to say and is further perpetuated by you and others, tha
68 CXB77L : I agree with your post except for one little nitpick: SQ's 777s that are being replaced are derated -200ERs. They have no -200 'A' models.[Edited 201
69 odwyerpw : Randy's comments were not inflammatory. However, definitely unnecessary. That said: The difference between 747-400 and A340 from 1987 onward is.... 74
70 hatbutton : My point was, many of these airlines have had the 767/747 in their fleets for 15-20 years, so retiring them for newer types seems normal. The A340 ha
71 knoxibus : I guess you forgot about the infamous video where two "Airbus engineers" in Toulouse just use glue and tape for making a (plastic) aircraft, aka the
72 Mir : Definitely new. -Mir
73 Acheron : Too many people posting in this thread who don't have a clue. Reminds me of the good ol' A v B thread. Except this time we have new cheerleaders, lol.
74 Zkpilot : because the A380 was and still is on time...? Oh and the A350 isn't late either... They have both had their problems. I personally think its not so m
75 328JET : That is really a "bad taste" campaign and i hope he knows that the good performance of the newer B777s was not a Boeing achievement - it was a result
76 Confuscius : They're wrong. It's a single family according to a.netters. They need to spend time here and search the discussion archives.
77 UALWN : 10 years ago 211 A340s had been delivered. How many of them have been stored or scrapped as of now? Answer: 5 (+ 5 write offs). The rest have been op
78 AA1818 : C'mon. Nothing he said was untrue nor overly harsh. He was poking a little fun, while touting the advantage of his products. Pretty common in the Ind
79 Post contains links zeke : I stated that the information contained in Seatguru is not accurate for the airline that I work for. That is not my opinion, it is a statement of fac
80 frmrCapCadet : I didn't see that video, you don't have a link by any chance? It sound like a fun few minutes diversion. What I found cynical about the extensive and
81 Post contains images jreuschl : Have there been any incidents over oceans that would back up Airbus' claim? So many more things can go wrong than just an engine, just ask AF 10 engin
82 Post contains images tsugambler : Come, now... I've never once heard John Leahy be viscuous! Vicious, yes, but never viscuous.
83 threepoint : What one would expect from a high-profile senior manager is the employment of a little more grace while referring to competitor's products. Smear tac
84 ikramerica : Give me a break. They did. PC going in for surgery/upgrade he might not survive? PC freezing up during the commercial? Those may be funny, but they a
85 Post contains links GBan : True. I remember "when they ever get it right" (regarding 737 MAX) in the global market forecast press conference in Dubai this year: http://videos.a
86 hatbutton : I'm not talking about the aircraft that are older than 10 years. I'm talking about the ones younger and will just be reaching 10 years upon removal f
87 Post contains images EPA001 : We can agree to disagree, but the distinction you now make was not in your original post. Which was: Now if you would have stated "the A340-500 &
88 Post contains images airbazar : "A few years later, Airbus threw in the towel by launching the A350 — a long haul twin of their own." So according to Randy, Airbus did nothing betw
89 tsugambler : Airbazar, I think he's implying that Airbus "threw in the towel" on their 4-engine philosophy by ceasing production of the A340, and switching to a 2-
90 UALWN : It is, but what I pointed out is that, so far, this has not happened: out of the 375 A340s produced so far only 5 are out of work (5 more having been
91 redflyer : Apple's adverts are precisely how to subtly bash the competition in a way that doesn't make you look bad. That is the key difference in the two compa
92 UALWN : I'm a clear pro-Airbus (but not anti-Boeing) person, and I didn't find the post particularly harsh or offensive. On the other hand, I didn't find it
93 lightsaber : Which is why I never liked the A340 'safety adds.' They should have sold dispatch reliability or other economic factors. It is best to not mention sa
94 Post contains images dynkrisolo : It appears most people here try to show that they have high moral standard. It a business world, trying to be a nice guy doesn't always get you to whe
95 ghifty : Wow! He's trolling. I follow his blog, and this one article doesn't really set the tone for the rest of his points. This "article" is lackluster and e
96 Post contains images airbazar : I don't think he is But he can't do that because the 777 has not outsold the competition (A330/A340), by a significant margin, if at all.
97 holzmann : I routinely fly IAD-FRA or IAD-MUC on LH B747/UAL B777 or A330, respectively. While LH offers better food, "free" beer/wine, WiFi, and better A/V, if
98 PolymerPlane : 208" is not the arm rest to arm rest width of A340 cabin, but 777's 229" is. armrest-to-arm rest width of A340 cabin is 204" if you want to compare t
99 garpd : I don't think so. The only people who realy care about what is said from the A or B farms are us, the enthusiasts. Airlines have more important thing
100 Post contains links hatbutton : They won't be completely retired. But they will leave the fleets of the airlines I listed. Which was my initial point. Even at a young age they don't
101 travelhound : I think the aspect of the 4 engines 4 long haul advertisements were they were directed to the end user (flying passengers) in an attempt to influence
102 Post contains images EPA001 : Which also the A380 enjoys and she enjoyed it first......... And Zeke posted not so long ago the humidity feature is also an option an the A330 or A3
103 UALWN : The 343s were acquired in 2003 from SQ (via Boeing). So if they flew for 5/6 years with SQ and almost 10 years with EK, I'd guess that neither SQ nor
104 Post contains links and images cmf : A post like his just after the closing of the models makes it look like it has caused him a lot of problems. I guess that is an underhanded complimen
105 Viscount724 : 446 DC-10s were built, including 60 KC-10s for the USAF.
106 Post contains links zeke : It is actually, see section 2-5-0 page 2 of http://www.airbus.com/fileadmin/medi...h_data/AC/Airbus_AC_A330_Jan11.pdf The equivalent dimension on the
107 lhrnue : While I completetly understand that airlines buy the 777 for it's efficency, as a passanger the inflight experience much more important. And here I pr
108 PW100 : He would make his company look a lot better by praising the A340, how good it was, how much passenger appeal it had. Only to follow that up by pointi
109 BrouAviation : The hypocrite posts of people pretending to take the highroad without acknowledging the fact that smearing has been a part of the business since many
110 Post contains images BrouAviation : You make some very valid points, but this is a nice comparison to talk a little more about. Imagine footballteam A versus footballteam B. Team A is c
111 ikramerica : VS was parroting Airbus marketing, and has since abandoned it as they have A330s in service and on order along with 789s. And VS is hardly an all imp
112 Post contains images lightsaber : But what if they could sell for more profit. From your link: A rollover will begin in February 2011 when Emirates starts phasing out 68 older widebod
113 UALWN : The A332 entered service in 1998 and its closest competitor was the new version of the 767 Boeing developed at the same time, with very similar capac
114 airbazar : That's your opinion and I respectfully disagree. The 767 direct competitor was the A300/A310. The A330/A340/777 came about as replacements for the DC
115 CXB77L : I agree. It's not Randy's job to be nice to Airbus. It's his job to sell Boeing aircraft. How he does it is his business. Secondly, this, being his '
116 Post contains images liftsifter : Hey Randy, how'd the 744 do before retirement..?
117 neutronstar73 : Zeke, you are incorrect again. Width bulkhead to bulkhead on the A330/A340 is 208 inches, and that's a measurement taken from near the floor. Shoulde
118 polot : With 694 sold...pretty well. Interesting little tidbit I just found, that is only 4 more than the total number of 772A/772ER/777LR/772F's sold (I lum
119 cmf : With the position he holds at Boeing and with his blogs being supported by Boeing there is no such thing as his personal opinion.
120 columba : What about the A330 ??? Really I believe this is story is just what it is a story......Airbus sales team is more professional than that. I remember o
121 Post contains images zeke : Sidewall to sidewall at armrest height it is 208.15" I know, that is shoulder width. Shoulder width is narrower normally due to the curvature of the
122 BrouAviation : No one denies the A330 outsold the 767, and it did for a reason: it is better. But many airlines used the A330-200 as a direct replacement for the 76
123 EPA001 : I would say you are incorrect here. The A330 lately is starting to replace versions of the B777-200(ER) due to its phenomenal development which has m
124 travelhound : In first reading the blog I felt it had an element of the Cringe factor. Thinking about the subject and the content of the blog, there is actually a
125 CXB77L : While that's true, BrouAviation was referring specifically to the A332, not the A330 series as a whole. Yes, A333s have been used to replace 772ERs i
126 bill142 : It's easy to sit back and poke fun now, but had Airbus and McDonnell Douglas waited 5 or so years before developing the A340 and MD-11 then the 777 mi
127 BrouAviation : I would say you read my post once more, as CXB77L points out you are correcting me on something I didn't say. Furthermore, I would like to point out
128 airbazar : No aircraft is ever designed at being a direct competitor of another aircraft. If that was the case the airline indiustry would be a very boring plac
129 Post contains images EPA001 : That is also more or less along the lines what I was stating earlier as well. You just described it better then I did. .
130 BrouAviation : Wait a minute here. I said the A332 is NOT a direct competitor for the 777, then you said I was wrong. Thus implicating it WAS a direct competitor (y
131 lhrnue : The only thing worse than calling a customer infamous is calling him not important.
132 racko : With this official blog post and an apparent Boeing employee trash-talking the competition on the forum, Boeing appears as a very sad company.
133 Post contains links GBan : I've posted it above - I don't think John Leahys little remark regarding the 737 MAX is much better. http://videos.airbus.com/video/iLyROoaf2iqA.html
134 bestwestern : "when they get it right"
135 garpd : History doesn't agree. The A345 and A346 were launched once the 777 was already in service. Neither sold in any great number so as to threaten the 77
136 UALWN : But the A345/6 launched before the 77W, and it was the 77W's great, and to a large degree unexpected, capability that eventually doomed the A346. The
137 Post contains images airbazar : Actually I admit that my statement was wrong. I shouldn't have said "never" But in general manufactures aim to design aircraft based on where they se
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...
Randy Takes A Stab At The B737/A320 Width Diff posted Fri Mar 3 2006 04:34:29 by SNATH
Jon Stewart Takes A Whack At The A380 posted Tue Jan 25 2005 03:12:48 by Espion007
Randy Baseler Takes The Gloves Off posted Sat Oct 8 2005 06:56:26 by NAV20
Why The A340/A330 Takes So Much Time To Climb? posted Sun Oct 26 2003 19:22:49 by B752fanatic
WHO´S The A340 At Mexico City posted Sun Apr 29 2001 03:11:58 by JARACO
Questions About The Ramp At The New UA/CO posted Mon Oct 3 2011 11:50:44 by WesternA318
How Many People In Flight At The Same Time? posted Fri Dec 31 2010 23:51:43 by trent1000
Will The New Engines Save The A340? posted Wed Dec 8 2010 06:27:01 by aquila3
AA Looking At The Middle East? posted Thu Dec 2 2010 17:51:00 by GlobalCabotage
What Is The TSA Doing At The Rental Car Building? posted Mon Nov 15 2010 15:41:23 by varigb707