Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Vs. Boeing: The Politics Of Choice  
User currently offlineholzmann From United States of America, joined Jan 2011, 269 posts, RR: 0
Posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3312 times:

After lurking here for many years, I finally decided to take the plunge.

I have been flying one way or another since I was an infant. I was a private pilot (in training) for a few years until finances dictated cheaper hobbies. I fly quite regularly both domestically (US) and internationally (To Europe) for business and leisure travel.

Anyway, to my thread topic...

To what extent do you all think "anti-Americanism" plays a role in an airline's decision to purchase Airbus over Boeing? Would a country, perhaps pissed off by American politics or unwilling to support a US defense contractor, want to purchase Boeing aircraft? I am or course specifically referring to those expanding economies in the Middle East and Asia. And to what extent, if anything, can Boeing distance itself from such political sentiments?

51 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineU2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3268 times:

I'm sure a lot of the time, not much. Most airlines tend to have a mixed fleet.

But I'm sure there is exceptions, AA comes to mind, but even with them, there is the A300 incidents to add to the equation.


User currently offlinemanfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3202 times:

The only limits of what or who Boeing would sell to are the limits set by out federal government. Just this month we find Boeing is fighting sanctions set on Iran. Although this doesn't have a huge impact on its bottom line, it costs millions in potential sales. This should tell you that Boeing (and exxon in this case) are all about business. They are in business to make money...it's that simple.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-0...-would-drop.html?xid=huffbloomberg

As most know, Boeing's products span much greater than just commercial aicraft. These transactions are typically handled with more care. Of course, since Boeing has a lot more to offer than other manufacturs, some countries don't have a choice but to buy from them.

In terms of airline choice? They should buy what they want from who they want. Airlines like American, Delta, Continental, Southwest, and Alaskan who have long ties with Boeing, take comfort in their relationships. It makes purchasing easer at a better price with more priority.

We will never know if the one manufacturer philosophy is the best route. Based on the success of Southwest and seeing that Delta and American have long been the leading carriers in the US, I can't help but to think it is. Three manufacturers who had "mixed" fleets (Northwest, United and USAir) have all sufferred. Is it that simple? I think so...other's however don't.

[Edited 2011-01-17 09:14:02]


757: The last of the best
User currently offline330Guy From Ireland, joined Nov 2010, 453 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3190 times:

Welcome to A.net

Yes and No, we would like to see it played fairly but Id be shocked if it didnt go on in one way or another.

But for the most part I think any credible airline wont take something like that into account.



Aircraft flown: a300/10/20/21/30/40, b727/37/47/57/67/, DC9, MD80-90, l1011, f50, atr42/72, shorts360, pc12
User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1867 posts, RR: 1
Reply 4, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3143 times:

While politics and bribery do play a role in aircraft acquisition, I'm not sure where you'll find much evidence of simple anti-Americanism.

Conviasa has Boeings, though maybe they won't like to buy more.

Air Koryo and Cubana are maybe special cases. Iran is also a special case, but they operate old Boeings, and I think they have said they'd like to buy more, if they were allowed.

That's about it, I think. So I don't think it's much to talk about.


User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 5, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 3127 times:

Quoting holzmann (Thread starter):
To what extent do you all think "anti-Americanism" plays a role in an airline's decision to purchase Airbus over Boeing?

Very little. While it varies by model and options, Airbus aircraft have tons of American content. Likewise, Boeing jets have a significant amount of foreign content. You're not really sticking-it to the U.S.A. by ordering one or the other.

Quoting holzmann (Thread starter):
I am or course specifically referring to those expanding economies in the Middle East and Asia

I think you should look at the fleets of those Middle Eastern or Asian airlines before jumping to conclusions about anti-American purchasing habits. Boeing is very successful in both regions.

Quoting U2380 (Reply 1):
But I'm sure there is exceptions, AA comes to mind, but even with them, there is the A300 incidents to add to the equation.

Likewise, I think it's absurd that there is a "buy American" mentality with U.S. airlines. There are more Airbus jets in operation within the U.S. than any other country. Even AA was at one time the largest passenger A300 operator. They had a bad experience dealing with Airbus and they won't do business with them for the foreseeable future. That has nothing to do with nationalist sentiment.


User currently offlinemanfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2991 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 5):
Likewise, I think it's absurd that there is a "buy American" mentality with U.S. airlines.

I think the problem propenents of the one manufacturer philosophy have with your assertion, is that you have to tag the word "absurd" to your opinion.

Why is something that works absurd? It also suggests that if your had your way, you would make a policy that forbids them from doing so. Our economy doesn't work that way and companies have freedom of choice.



757: The last of the best
User currently offlineU2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 8 hours ago) and read 2991 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 5):
I think it's absurd that there is a "buy American" mentality with U.S. airlines.

I don't remember saying that there was.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 5):
That has nothing to do with nationalist sentiment.

I don't remember saying that it defiantly did. I said that they come to mind, seeing as they have no Airbus or anything but (mainly) American built aeroplanes in their fleet. However I then went on to mention the A300 situation.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 5):
There are more Airbus jets in operation within the U.S. than any other country.

There are more aeroplanes operating in the U.S than anywhere else, your point is?br>
[Edited 2011-01-17 09:29:23]

[Edited 2011-01-17 09:33:36]

User currently offlinetharanga From United States of America, joined Apr 2009, 1867 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2945 times:

Quoting manfredj (Reply 6):
I think the problem propenents of the one manufacturer philosophy have with your assertion, is that you have to tag the word "absurd" to your opinion.

I think there is a misunderstanding here.

It was being demonstrated that there is no "buy american" mindset among US carriers. Thus, the idea that there is one is absurd. This is easily shown by glancing at the fleets of US, UA, NW/DL, B6 and F9.

Just as the idea (from the OP) that Middle East and Asian countries might avoid Boeing is absurd. A mere glance at their fleets, laden with 777s, would prove that.


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 9, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2916 times:

I think if you look at the areas where Boeing sells commercial aircraft (747 freighters, the 777 family, the 787 family and the 737NG) they have a very compelling product. There isnt, perhaps with the notable exception of the 748i, any product in its lineup where you cannot make a case that it has the edge over its competition in some respects.

Companies buy the 737NG because it works the best for them. Companies buy the 77W because there isnt anything that offers the same payload/range combo at that operating cost, and companies buy the 77L because it offers unmatched range payload for what it does. I could go on.

Airbus' current product line is equally competitive and the two OEMs are so close in terms of price/capacity/range/payload/operating costs etc for their respective products, that things like training costs, currency exchange rate differentials etc generally end up being the deal maker or breaker. Politics is a bigger issue that it should be i think.

There arent too many companies in the world that wouldnt buy an American plane due to political issues, but i would respectfully contend that there are more airlines that wouldnt buy an Airbus due to political issues.

The numbers of both are dwindling thank God, and it is hoped that in the future, once some people have dealt with the fact that Airbus is here to stay, that protectionist politics will pay less of a role in the future. Of course, with massive billion dollar deals such as big airliner purchases, there will always be political pressure and both sides are as guilty as the other in this respect. There are markets where Boeing may be disadvantaged because of their nationality but I cannot think of any off the top of my head. The likes of Morocco, Pakistan, UAE, Jordan, Syria, China, Turkey, Russia and a few others could claim to be on opposite sides to the US politically and socio-religiously, but with the exception of Jordan and Syria, all have signed big Boeing deals in the recent past, so maybe it is not as big an issue as some may think.

Likewise there are the likes of Canada, South Korea, the USA, Japan etc where Airbus might be construed as being disadvantaged because of being "un-American" but again, in all three countries, there have been big Airbus deals in the recent past.

Sometimes it gets out of hand. I remember AI ordered a load of A343s back in the day, and the order was overturned and cancelled in the event due to intense political pressure from the Americans, who got a big 777 order out of it. I dont think anyone (except for the Americans) enjoyed seeing that go the way it did, with political jockeying and horse-trading and allegations of bribery and "wheel greasing" going backwards and forwards, but thats how it goes sometimes.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlinedfwrevolution From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1001 posts, RR: 51
Reply 10, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2898 times:

Quoting U2380 (Reply 7):

U2380, my apologies, you do not have to worry. I was not responding directly at you, but instead at those who might take your post as saying U.S. airlines have their own national preferences.   

Quoting U2380 (Reply 7):
There are more aeroplanes operating in the U.S than anywhere else, your point is?

It's proof that U.S. airlines don't succumb to national preferences.


User currently offlineU2380 From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2010, 325 posts, RR: 0
Reply 11, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2854 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 10):
U2380, my apologies, you do not have to worry. I was not responding directly at you, but instead at those who might take your post as saying U.S. airlines have their own national preferences.

Oh, Ok thanks for the clarification.

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 10):
It's proof that U.S. airlines don't succumb to national preferences.

Ok, Fair dues.   


User currently offlineCHRISBA777ER From UK - England, joined Mar 2001, 5964 posts, RR: 62
Reply 12, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2830 times:

Quoting dfwrevolution (Reply 10):
Quoting U2380 (Reply 7):
There are more aeroplanes operating in the U.S than anywhere else, your point is?

It's proof that U.S. airlines don't succumb to national preferences.

That may be true now, but it certainly has not been in the past, and it certainly is not true of the fanboys of said US majors on here who most certainly DO succumb to petty national preferences. See the recent DL narrowbody thread for some shining examples of some of the worst anti-Airbus/anti-European rhetoric this site has to offer. There have been people on here seriously trying to tell us that DL prefer the 764ER over the A332, and would dump the Airbus in favour of more of the Boeing if they could, or indeed, that UACO will dump their huge A32X fleet in favour of more of the 737NG, despite having a smaller fleet of them at present. We've also been told that now UACO has been merged, the A350s UA ordered will not be taken up and the new company will buy more Boeings instead. Its embarrassing to read sometimes. I would be heartbroken if i were American to read this xenophobic claptrap flag waving in my name.

Good job these people do not make the fleet decisions at their respective airlines, is all I can say.



What do you mean you dont have any bourbon? Do you know how far it is to Houston? What kind of airline is this???
User currently offlinekaitak From Ireland, joined Aug 1999, 12596 posts, RR: 34
Reply 13, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2750 times:

Quoting holzmann (Thread starter):
To what extent do you all think "anti-Americanism" plays a role in an airline's decision to purchase Airbus over Boeing?

I don't think anti-Americanism plays a part with the airlines themselves to any significant extent; in those countries where anti-Americanism is particularly strong (Iran, NK, Cuba) sanctions will probably be in place anyway, so it's kind of academic. All that said, this is NOT the same as saying that politics doesn't play a role; it most certainly does, but in a positive way, i.e. it's not a question of being anti-this or pro-that; it's a question of what can we get as a result of choosing one side over another. If you look at many major state carriers, their fleet will reflect a fairly strong split; TK and TG are two very good examples. Another is China; we have Mr. Hu in Washington this week, making sure all the bases are covered; China buys widely from the US (who would bet against a significant Boeing order this week) and from Airbus. Now, Hu is in Washington (let's call it first base) and you can bet that his reasons for buying Boeings will not be based on anti-European sentiment, and vice versa (when Airbuses are ordered).

So, politics comes into it VERY much, but it's rarely due to anti-Americanism and MUCH more to maximise the interests of the country/airline in question; after all, airline purchases (along with military purchases) are almost always the largest trade deals between two countries, so naturally the buying country wants to make sure it gets its monies worth!

Quoting manfredj (Reply 2):
This should tell you that Boeing (and exxon in this case) are all about business. They are in business to make money...it's that simple.

As is everyone - airlines too!


User currently offline1337Delta764 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6648 posts, RR: 2
Reply 14, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2730 times:

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 12):
DL prefer the 764ER over the A332

That actually is the sworn truth.

Quoting CHRISBA777ER (Reply 12):
See the recent DL narrowbody thread for some shining examples of some of the worst anti-Airbus/anti-European rhetoric this site has to offer

Seems like there are more pro-Airbus comments than anti-Airbus comments in that thread.



The Pink Delta 767-400ER - The most beautiful aircraft in the sky
User currently offlineDahlgardo From Denmark, joined Sep 2004, 136 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 2662 times:

Nationalistic US preferences for Boeing do exist IMHO

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Josh Akbar



It is pretty remarkable, that huge US airlines like AA, CO (pre UACO), DL appears to be persuing a "buy Boeing no matter what"-philosophy. Such a tendency doesn't really exist in Europe, where AF, BA and LH all are major Boeing costumers, despite the respective national states relations to Airbus.

In a global marketplace, I have little sympathy for protectionism and nationalism, since neither of them will benifit the economy long run.



Nothing to say
User currently offlinePacNWjet From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 980 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2616 times:

Quoting Dahlgardo (Reply 15):
Nationalistic US preferences for Boeing do exist IMHO

Alaska Airlines airlines is a special case. Alaska (despite it name) is headquartered in Seattle; Boeing, despite having its corporate headquarters in Chicago, is still largely based in Seattle. This is an issue of Alaska Airlines and Boeing both being part of the "hometown team" in Seattle. In my opinion, it has nothing to do with Alaska asserting some sort of nationalistic motivation. It's just about two Seattle companies (Boeing's corporate headquarters in Chicago notwithstanding) expressing municipal hometown pride.


User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21521 posts, RR: 53
Reply 17, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2613 times:

Quoting Dahlgardo (Reply 15):
Nationalistic US preferences for Boeing do exist IMHO

Do you have any explicit validation for that specific claim?

Alaska may be a bad example since their use of 737s has been said to be at least in part related to its somewhat better suitability to austere airfields which appears plausible; Airbus has made a different tradeoff which on the one hand will now make the A320 NEO easier to implement but doesn't suit specialist airlines like Alaska as well.

Quoting Dahlgardo (Reply 15):
It is pretty remarkable, that huge US airlines like AA, CO (pre UACO), DL appears to be persuing a "buy Boeing no matter what"-philosophy.

It may not be quite as simple as that. Such a single-supplier situation can be somewhat symbiotic and does not need to be based on jingoistic motives (it better shouldn't be – in the end, most airline shareholders usually look out for their own value first and foremost).

The supplier will remain under pressure to match or better any offer by the competition (which can be painful) not least to avoid a high-profile customer defection.

The customer, on the other hand, can squeeze the manufacturer a good bit harder than usual but may miss out on a competitive advantage available to their direct competition using the other manufacturer's gear.

Unless the manufacturer resorts to outright dumping in this kind of deal (which will be dangerous), such situations tend to be unstable in the long run; I doubt that they will persist for very long.


User currently offlineCargoLex From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 1278 posts, RR: 8
Reply 18, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 6 hours ago) and read 2615 times:

I don't think that AS being all-Boeing necessarily indicates that they eschewed Airbus because Airbus isn't an American company. It's a big leap to suggest that. But AS has operated Boeing NBs since the 727 and had an infrastructure that was far more suited to adding more 737s than adding another type from another manufacturer. They used to also fly products from Douglas before deciding that it made more sense economically to operate only one basic type a-la Ryanair/Southwest.

An airline like AS watches the bottom line most of all, although being based in Seattle, saying that they are "Proudly all-Boeing" isn't a bad thing for them and may actually have some serious local appeal. But I don't think their choice was made on the grounds of "We're going to buy American no matter what else we're offered."

Similarly, B6 operates only Airbus and Embraer types because they've focused around those types since inception. They wouldn't add the 73G now because it would not make economical sense to do so with a huge fleet of A320s. I don't think anybody at B6 is "Anti American."

Basically, IMO, airlines decide what to buy mostly based on what works for them unless there are strong political considerations, such as the cases of Cubana, Air Koryo, or perhaps El Al.


User currently onlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15834 posts, RR: 27
Reply 19, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days 2 hours ago) and read 2527 times:

Quoting Dahlgardo (Reply 15):
Nationalistic US preferences for Boeing do exist IMHO

That's after the fact marketing. They are trying to appeal to the moronic people who actually do go out of their way to buy American, not to mention the local Seattle population. It's worth noting that even Boeing does not give a crap who's planes their people fly.

If the A320 had been determined to be a better deal for Alaska, they would have taken it.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinehka098 From United States of America, joined Oct 2010, 556 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 3 days ago) and read 2483 times:

I would think the airlines would opt for the best aircraft for their money. Politics aside, don't most airlines lease their aircraft?

User currently offlineFlyDeltaJets87 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 2444 times:

Quoting manfredj (Reply 2):
We will never know if the one manufacturer philosophy is the best route. Based on the success of Southwest and seeing that Delta and American have long been the leading carriers in the US, I can't help but to think it is. Three manufacturers who had "mixed" fleets (Northwest, United and USAir) have all sufferred. Is it that simple? I think so...other's however don't.

Nearly every airline has mixed fleets. AA and DL did and do have mixed fleets. Were those MD-80s and MD-88s built by Boeing? No, they weren't (Funny that everyone seems to forget that there used to be more than one major airliner manufacturer in the US.) They may be "Boeing MD-80s" and "Boeing MD-88s" now, but I doubt AA and DL foresaw that when they ordered their MD-80 and MD-88 fleets from McDonnell-Douglas. And DL's fleet, with the NW merger, is now far more mixed than UA's fleet of A319s and A320s.

Just calling it how I see it there.

Quoting Dahlgardo (Reply 15):
Such a tendency doesn't really exist in Europe, where AF, BA and LH all are major Boeing costumers, despite the respective national states relations to Airbus.

Oh really? LH's shorthaul fleet is much more Airbus than Boeing. LH has 49 new shorthaul aircraft on order. All 49 of those will come from the factory in Hamburg. What isn't Airbus is Boeing 737-300s and 737-500s. I highly doubt those are recent orders, and much more likely are some of LH's oldest birds, which shows me when it comes to its shorthaul fleet, LH is going to favor the company that builds planes in the same country, unless you want to explain this as a "coincidence". Now I'm not even saying I have a problem with this. I under and respect LH's philosophy if they wish to support German-based jobs. I'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic that you either didn't think about it or just decided to brush aside.

[Edited 2011-01-17 20:11:12]

User currently offlineWarRI1 From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 9292 posts, RR: 12
Reply 22, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 2420 times:

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 21):
I under and respect LH's philosophy if they wish to support German-based jobs. I'm just pointing out the flaw in your logic that you either didn't think about it or just decided to brush aside.

Exactly, I think we will see more and more of this, the protection of home based jobs, gasp! even in Europe. I love the reaction to anyone in the US who advocate protecting US jobs. I notice we are accused on a regular basis from other countries, especially Europe it seems. I have to wonder what Airbus is doing, what Embraer is doing, what Bombardier is doing, protecting US jobs? I do not think so.



It is better to die on your feet, than live on your knees.
User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21521 posts, RR: 53
Reply 23, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 2385 times:

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 21):
Quoting Dahlgardo (Reply 15):
Such a tendency doesn't really exist in Europe, where AF, BA and LH all are major Boeing costumers, despite the respective national states relations to Airbus.

Oh really?

Yes, really. It has been LH's practice to have a mixed fleet for a long time by now.

They have been the launch customer of the 737, if you might recall. At this point they've got 737, 747-400, MD-11F and soon they'll add 747-800i as one of only two airlines worldwide beside their Airbus aircraft.
Lufthansa Fleet | Airfleets aviation

Quoting FlyDeltaJets87 (Reply 21):
LH is going to favor the company that builds planes in the same country, unless you want to explain this as a "coincidence".

You are simply wrong on that one. LH has always had a much clearer head in their fleet planning than you seem to know, and that is a good thing.

By the way: Air France is a major 747 and 777 operator as well:
Air France Fleet | Airfleets aviation

Successful airlines can't afford shortsighted and petty feelings controlling their business decisions.


User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 20355 posts, RR: 59
Reply 24, posted (3 years 11 months 1 week 2 days 18 hours ago) and read 2372 times:

Quoting Dahlgardo (Reply 15):
Such a tendency doesn't really exist in Europe, where AF, BA and LH all are major Boeing costumers, despite the respective national states relations to Airbus.

IB has no Boeing orders.

But the only US major (and by "major" I mean a large airline operating more than one type) that is truly all-Boeing at this time is AA (counting McD as Boeing). DL inherited a lot of Airbii and it turns out that they're very happy with them. They are most certainly considering Airbus in their future fleet plans. UA has a bunch of A350's on order and they haven't been canceled since the merger.

It's easy for AS and WN to be all-Boeing. They operate one and only one fleet type: the 737. But if either airline started looking into the widebody market, I bet they would consider both manufacturers carefully. It would amuse, but not completely shock me to see an AS A330.


25 Post contains links Superfly : Sure about that? http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...o-take-russian-built-aircraft.html Good point but any attempt to bash the United States is fa
26 OzGlobal : Why only frame the question about others? The US are as protectionist as any major power, especially in defense related procurement. The tanker fiasc
27 Post contains images FlyDeltaJets87 : Gee, maybe because Airbus didn't have any short-haul aircraft to offer until the mid-1980s? No, that couldn't be a huge part of the answer... Just as
28 Klaus : If LH conducted its fleet management as small-mindedly and pettily as you seem to think, they would have no Boeing and no Douglas planes in their fle
29 scbriml : You're right, it couldn't. Because actually, the reverse is closer to the truth. Maybe, instead of throwing barbs at other posters or Lufthansa, you
30 NAV20 : holzmann, I tend to think either 'minimally' or 'not at all.' Airlines, first and foremost, have to choose the best aeroplanes for their intended pur
31 FlyDeltaJets87 : Where am I "throwing barbs" at Lufthansa? In Reply 21, I said I don't have a problem with this mentality (buying from in-country suppliers to support
32 Klaus : That could be a possibility. Where you're really making a mistake is by unconditionally excluding every other possible explanation. Another explanati
33 Post contains links and images Acheron : Yeah, the A320 family can't take off from austere airfields at all. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XjNkgpsp2Ys Orly? Guess what, the Russian governme
34 Post contains images FlyDeltaJets87 : Are you putting it on record that the Boeing 747-8I is now a "Shorthaul" aircraft? Ah, you must have failed reading comprehension, as the key word in
35 Post contains images francoflier : If by 'plunge' you mean throwing a brick in the fishpond, then, definitely! Remember the rules of A.net: #1. It is an A v. B thread #2. If it isn't a
36 Superfly : Too bad for me? I don't work for Boeing. Not sure what's the purpose of throwing barbs.
37 WarRI1 : I just checked, and unless I am mistaken, I do not see one aircraft of US origin, in the modern fleet. Funny that. If I remember correctly, Spain has
38 OA412 : Have you actually looked at the ages of said posters. None of them are DL employees, just kids in their teens and early twenties who don't know much
39 Post contains images Klaus : Nice one! But this video actually demonstrates what I've been referring to near the end: They are using tractors and forklifts to unload the A319, wh
40 scbriml : But it's been clearly demonstrated that that wasn't their mentality. It was because Boeing didn't have a competitive product when LH needed it. It wa
41 NAV20 : Agree entirely, scrimbl. Except that I have to question the issue of 'perfectly acceptable Airbus alternatives.' At the end of the day, Airbus so far
42 Post contains images travelavnut : Wow, just wow.... I'm almost impressed at the amount of prejudice and ignorance that can be crammed into one post, but it looks like you have outdone
43 NAV20 : It just plain IS, chum. The same basic 8-across fuselage - the A340 had four smaller engines instead of two bigger ones, that's the only serious vari
44 travelavnut : So the fuselage defines model? So the 707, 727, 737 are the same model? And the fact that the A300 and A310 where developed for completly different m
45 Klaus : That's obviously a prejudice-tinged interpretation on your part, but very unlikely to match the actual attitudes at Airbus. Airbus had the models the
46 Post contains images NAV20 : Sorry mate, did 'shoot from the hip' a bit. Of course, it can sometimes make sense (in all business fields) to 'reinforce success.' But, to my mind,
47 travelavnut : Luckily Airbus is managed by capable people. Well my humble opinion is that the A380 is no mistake, looking at the order book and the potential in th
48 Post contains images Klaus : So they should have stopped making commercial airplanes because they've been too successful at it? Sorry, not following. Projects of that magnitude j
49 Post contains images scbriml : Oh dear! You seem to have reverted to type. You've been predicting the imminent demise of Airbus for years. Years ago you claimed the A320 had "stopp
50 NAV20 : I'm afraid that it IS irrelevant, travelavnut. The way you evaluate any new project is to calculate the expected cash flow right through design and m
51 Klaus : The total number of sales is obviously subject to revision as time goes on. By your own criteria, the 747 would "never" have achieved break-even eith
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...
The Politics Of Petroleum posted Fri May 14 2004 20:42:05 by LatinAviation
Airbus Vs. Boeing posted Tue Mar 25 2003 18:02:04 by DeltaASA16
The Battle Of Stars:Warren VS. Arnold posted Fri Nov 4 2005 20:20:14 by Psa53
The Nexus Of Politics And Terror posted Thu Oct 13 2005 16:15:48 by AeroWesty
Boeing/Airbus Vs. Conservative/Liberal posted Sun Sep 4 2005 20:34:45 by Kykevin54
Freedom Of Speech Vs Islam, The Dutch Experience. posted Mon Nov 8 2004 17:44:33 by DIJKKIJK
Excellent Commentary On The BS Of Race Politics posted Mon Sep 8 2003 16:27:34 by Matt D
Dispute About US Politics Of The Past: What For? posted Wed Jul 16 2003 12:40:38 by Aloges
Glass Front Soda Machines - The Way Of The Future? posted Tue Jan 4 2011 17:15:50 by 1337Delta764
The Blizzard Of 2010 posted Sun Dec 26 2010 19:46:09 by dragon-wings