leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:27 pm

Sources in London told ATWOnline yesterday that Udvar-Hazy's comments in Orlando may have been promoted by those within Airbus who desire an all-new aircraft to combat not only the Dreamliner but the 777, which eclipsed the A340 family last year.

http://www.atwonline.com/news/story.html?storyID=4534
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
MarkATL
Posts: 486
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:07 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:36 pm

Ooooooh, "sources" eh? Sounds like a Dale Gribble aka Rusty Shackleford quote.
"...left my home in Georgia, 'n headed for the "Frisco" Bay...
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:42 pm

At a guess, 'some within Airbus' could very well include the Daimler-Chrysler bloc and BAe.  Smile

Does begin to look as if the A350 is DOA.......
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 5:09 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
Sources in London told ATWOnline yesterday that Udvar-Hazy's comments in Orlando may have been promoted by those within Airbus who desire an all-new aircraft

I missed that when I read the item. Thanks. And it has a ring of truth to it. Airbus were clearly wrong-footed by the 787 and their reaction has been hasty and unconvincing. The 777-300ER has turned out to be better than expected and the A340-600 not (quite) as good as expected. People in Toulouse (and elsewhere) aren't stupid. They'll talk their products up in public but behind the scenes there must be some furious arguments going on. It seems increasingly improbable that anything that will come off the A330/A340/A350 line will ever outperform the 777 and 787 at their best. Sales won't dry up, of course. The A350 is selling (though nowhere near as well as the 787) and there may yet be life in upgrades of the A340. But going down that path concedes 60-80% of the market to Boeing for the next decade or more.

The problem is that the time, cost, and public loss-of-face of opting for an all-new design (or designs) will be bitter pills for Airbus to swallow. But I'd bet that some insiders have concluded that they have no choice. Whisper as much in Steve's ear and let him crank up the pressure.

In short, this is a "conspiracy theory" I can believe.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 2):
BAe

Some years ago this company changed its name to BAE SYSTEMS.
 
Thorben
Posts: 2713
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:04 pm

Airbus shouldn't overhaul the A350. When people talk of the sales difference between it and the 787 they tend to neglect that the latter could be ordered two years earlier. In competitions such as the ones at QR (where the A350 won) or QF (where the 787 won because of a lower price) the A350 showed that it can compete with the 787. I don't know how people can come up with a 75 to 25 figure. It may be 60 to 40, but Boeing can have the larger orders with the larger rebates while Airbus gets smaller orders with smaller discounts. Boeing is after market share, Airbus wants profit. They can both get what they want.

What Airbus should do is introduce a new type between the A359 and the A380. The A346 is nice, but even with an A346E there is too much of a size gap between it and the A380.
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
User avatar
sebolino
Posts: 3495
Joined: Tue May 29, 2001 11:26 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:11 pm

It's well known that there are 2 schools at Airbus: the one who want to answer fast to Boeing and the 787, and the other who think each plane should be designed from scratch ("each plane should be a revolution").
The first one seems to have won for the moment, but things could change.
 
Tifoso
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:15 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:12 pm

Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
QF (where the 787 won because of a lower price)

This is false. QF made it clear in the press conference that both manufacturers were very close in terms of price. They chose the 787 because of technical superiority, and earlier availability.

Quoting PM (Reply 3):
The problem is that the time, cost, and public loss-of-face of opting for an all-new design (or designs) will be bitter pills for Airbus to swallow.

Is loss-of-face going to be such a big issue? I don't know. If its quite clear that the A350 does not match up to the 787, what's wrong with refining (or re-doing) the product? The airlines would love it, for they would now have some good competition between the two manufacturers. Airbus, I'm sure does not care much about what the general public folk think; they'll fly whatever jet an airline puts them on.
 
Thorben
Posts: 2713
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:16 pm

Quoting Tifoso (Reply 6):
This is false. QF made it clear in the press conference that both manufacturers were very close in terms of price. They chose the 787 because of technical superiority, and earlier availability.

What I remember is they first told everyone how close the planes where and then, after going for Boeing, the suddenly told how much better it was. The truth probably was that Airbus wouldn't lower the price any more because it didn't want to have one year's production for planes that don't contribute much to the R & D cost. Boeing can do that since the Japanese government and the state of Washington pays them enough to produce planes.
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
Tifoso
Posts: 432
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 9:15 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:22 pm

Well Thorben, you are free to conjure up your own version of the truth and take solace in the thought that a QF loss was only based on price. I don't think it's a true representation of what happened though.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
Boeing can do that since the Japanese government and the state of Washington pays them enough to produce planes.

 rotfl   rotfl 
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:22 pm

That's what most people - including people who work there - still call it, PM. Still, thanks for the correction - I'll call it BAE SYSTEMS if you in your turn will stop using the informal term 'Airbus' and instead refer henceforward to 'the Airbus Division of the European Aeronautics, Defence, and Space Company.' NV  Smile

Found this article by Carol Matlack, the long-serving and distinguished Paris correspondent of 'Business Week'. First mention I've seen of the possibility that Airbus (sorry, 'EADS NV'  Smile) may not in fact be able to AFFORD to develop a 'clean sheet' answer to the 787 unless it receives 'launch aid':-

"The Escalating Woes at Airbus - Just when things were going so well for the European plane maker, two major customers demand costly redesigns. The likely winner: Boeing

"Airbus, struggling to gain altitude against a couple of archrival Boeing's (BA) hot-selling models, has hit two major patches of turbulence in the past few days.

"On Mar. 28, the European planemaker's biggest customer, the International Lease Finance Corp., a Los Angeles-based subsidiary of American International Group (AIG), called for a top-to-bottom redesign of the A350, the plane Airbus plans to launch as a rival to Boeing's 787 Dreamliner.

"FUEL FACTOR. Then, on Mar. 30, Airbus acknowledged that Dubai-based airline Emirates, the biggest buyer of its A340 widebody plane, has delayed a $4 billion order for 20 of the aircraft because it wants them redesigned to match the fuel efficiency of Boeing's competing 787 model.

"This adds up to a big embarrassment for Airbus. But even more important, these public rebukes by two key customers are likely to cause severe problems for Airbus's financial-planning and marketing efforts.

"FEW OPTIONS. Yet industry watchers say Airbus will probably be forced to revamp the plane, even though the changes suggested by Udvar-Hazy would boost development costs from $5.3 billion to as much as $10 billion. Airbus' current design is based on its existing A330 widebody plane, with the addition of more fuel-efficient engines and increased use of lightweight composites.

"At the conference, Udvar-Hazy said that a design based on "leftovers" would sell poorly against the 787, perhaps winning as little as 25% of the market. "Airbus has boxed themselves in on the A350," he told BusinessWeek Online earlier in March. "Airbus has to make some changes."

"Even before the criticism by Udvar-Hazy, Airbus was struggling to match Boeing's sales success with the 787. Since putting the A350 on the market in December, 2004, Airbus has logged 100 firm orders -- including an order for nine planes signed on Mar. 30, 2006, by Finnair. That compared with 291 orders booked by Boeing for the 787 since May, 2004.

"FINANCIAL SQUEEZE. While redesigning the A350 might attract more customers, it would cause big headaches for Airbus. It would delay the launch of the plane, now scheduled to enter service in 2010, about two years after the 787. That would give Boeing an edge in snaring orders from carriers eager to expand their fleets quickly.

"Moreover, it's unclear how Airbus would finance R&D for a more-expensive A350 without loans from European governments. Airbus has used such loans in the past to pay for up to one-third the cost of developing new planes such as the doubledecker A380. But now the U.S. has complained to the World Trade Organization that the loans amount to unfair subsidies.

"Airbus, in hopes of reaching a negotiated settlement in the WTO dispute, until now has not requested any government loans for the A350. But analysts say Airbus can't afford to finance a $10 billion project out of current cash flow."


http://www.businessweek.com/globalbi...tent/mar2006/gb20060330_075258.htm
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:20 pm

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
What I remember is they first told everyone how close the planes where and then, after going for Boeing, the suddenly told how much better it was. The truth probably was that Airbus wouldn't lower the price any more because it didn't want to have one year's production for planes that don't contribute much to the R & D cost. Boeing can do that since the Japanese government and the state of Washington pays them enough to produce planes.

Your are entitled to your opinion. However, both of the OEMs sit in front of the governmental trough as much as possible in numerous ways, neither comes to the "subsidies" debate with "clean hands," and the complex calculus necessary to sort out how all this relates to the pricing of individual deals is certainly beyond the ken of most members of this forum.
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:26 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 9):
That's what most people - including people who work there - still call it, PM. Still, thanks for the correction - I'll call it BAE SYSTEMS if you in your turn will stop using the informal term 'Airbus' and instead refer henceforward to 'the Airbus Division of the European Aeronautics, Defence, and Space Company.' NV

Still don't know what was wrong with Hawker Siddeley...  Sad
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:30 pm

Cheers, PM.

Or De Havilland, come to that.  Smile
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:34 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 12):
Or De Havilland, come to that.

Ah, but that's 'cause you're older than me!   By the time I picked up the story it was HSA and BAC. (Not to mention Sud Aviation and MBB...)

[Edited 2006-03-31 12:58:23]
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:40 pm

Quoting PM (Reply 11):
Quoting NAV20 (Reply 9):
That's what most people - including people who work there - still call it, PM. Still, thanks for the correction - I'll call it BAE SYSTEMS if you in your turn will stop using the informal term 'Airbus' and instead refer henceforward to 'the Airbus Division of the European Aeronautics, Defence, and Space Company.' NV

Still don't know what was wrong with Hawker Siddeley...

Actually, isn't the official name: Airbus SAS? Technically, I don't think "Airbus" can be considered a "division" of EADS as it's not a wholly-owned by them, but that's just me being anal.  Smile I mourn the demise of the Hawker Siddeley brand name as well. Sad
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 8:55 pm

Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
QF (where the 787 won because of a lower price)

QF said the key difference was earlier availability, in terms of performance and price the planes were very close.

Quoting Tifoso (Reply 8):
Well Thorben, you are free to conjure up your own version of the truth and take solace in the thought that a QF loss was only based on price. I don't think it's a true representation of what happened though.

Well it is a fact that massive subsidies permit Boeing to offer the 787 at a very low price, such that EADS for one (admittedly not necessarily an impartial entity) has called it dumping.
 
WINGS
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:36 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:03 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
Sources in London told ATWOnline yesterday that Udvar-Hazy's comments in Orlando may have been promoted by those within Airbus who desire an all-new aircraft to combat not only the Dreamliner but the 777

Dammmm I knew I spoke out too loud. Big grin

Regards,
Wings
Aviation Is A Passion.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:05 pm

Funny how far back some of those names go. I can still dimly remember the days when the chairman of Hawker Siddeley was one Sir Thomas Sopwith. Of 'Camel' fame......
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:06 pm

Quoting WINGS (Reply 16):
Dammmm I knew I spoke out too loud.

Wasn't the famous double-agent of WWII "Garbo" based in Lisbon?  Smile
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:07 pm

Quoting WINGS (Reply 16):
Dammmm I knew I spoke out too loud.

So it'll be your fault when the A350 is cancelled and TAP have to lease back their old TriStars! I'd go underground, if I were you!  Wink
 
leelaw
Posts: 4520
Joined: Sat May 29, 2004 4:13 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:34 pm

Quoting Joni (Reply 15):
EADS for one (admittedly not necessarily an impartial entity)

This has my nomination for understatement of the day.  Smile
Lex Ancilla Justitiae
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:43 pm

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 17):
Funny how far back some of those names go. I can still dimly remember the days when the chairman of Hawker Siddeley was one Sir Thomas Sopwith. Of 'Camel' fame......

That isn't something I'd want to admit! Was Sydney Camm still designing things?!

Such a roll-call of ghosts. The only sadder story is that of the British car industry. In 1950 it made 50% of all cars in Europe...
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:51 pm

Maybe I should wave my walking-stick at some of these younger lads and say, "You mark my words! I've seen more bloody aeroplane firms go broke in my time than you've 'ad 'ot dinners..."  Smile
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
WINGS
Posts: 2312
Joined: Tue May 31, 2005 1:36 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Commen

Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:02 pm

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 18):
Wasn't the famous double-agent of WWII "Garbo" based in Lisbon? Smile

Have no idea Leelaw. Portugal was a neutral country during WWII.

Quoting PM (Reply 19):

So it'll be your fault when the A350 is cancelled and TAP have to lease back their old TriStars!

Hey PM that would actually be sweet. Can you actually imagine a return of the good old L1011?

http://www.cardatabase.net/modifiedairlinerphotos/photos/big/00004716.jpg

Quoting PM (Reply 19):
I'd go underground, if I were you! Wink

That's right PM. I would not want any trouble from this bloke.



One scary looking bloke when he is angry.

Regards,
Wings
Aviation Is A Passion.
 
User avatar
PM
Posts: 4822
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:12 pm

Quoting WINGS (Reply 23):
Hey PM that would actually be sweet. Can you actually imagine a return of the good old L1011?

A great colour scheme on a classic airliner. Love it!

Quoting WINGS (Reply 23):
One scary looking bloke when he is angry.

He scares me even when he's not...!  scared 

(Actually, this is all double bluff. I think you are Forgeard!)
 
Halibut
Posts: 943
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2005 8:43 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 10:23 pm

Published: Wednesday, March 29, 2006

Boeing's strategy is working, expert says  biggrin 


Bryan Corliss
Herald columnist


http://www.heraldnet.com/stories/06/03/29/100bus_corliss001.cfm

Hazy predicted that Airbus will announce even more changes to its A350 design by the Farnborough Air Show this summer, to better compete with Boeing's 787.

The problem, he said, is that the A350 is a hybrid incorporating a some of the technology advances Boeing has put into the 787, but it is still firmly wedded to Airbus' traditional product lines and is not different enough from the A330, which it is supposed to replace.

In terms of its fuselage size, "it's still an old A300," Hazy said. "It's not optimized. It's not where the 777 and 787 are."

Instead, he said, the A350 is more akin to the Boeing planes of the late '90s, planes such as the 767-400ER, which were "low business-risk models ... that really didn't catch on in the marketplace."


Halibut
6 million Jews were slaughtered-Do you see Jews flying planes into buildings in Germany to kill 1000s of innocent, NO !
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:25 pm

Quoting Joni (Reply 15):
QF said the key difference was earlier availability, in terms of performance and price the planes were very close.

Not true, read the press release from QF

Mr Dixon said the B787's lighter fuselage, which was constructed from composite material, allowed the aircraft to:

* fly further with a full payload;
* burn less fuel;
* fly faster than any other aircraft of its size; and
* reduce maintenance costs.

"The composite fuselage also allows increased window size and a lower cabin altitude pressure that reduces the effects of jetlag."


While earlier slots certainly helped, you just can't ignore these comments.

http://www.qantas.com.au/regions/dyn.../details?ArticleID=2005/dec05/3369

Quoting Joni (Reply 15):
Well it is a fact that massive subsidies permit Boeing to offer the 787 at a very low price, such that EADS for one (admittedly not necessarily an impartial entity) has called it dumping.

Also not true, the reason why the 787 is being offered at a lower price is because of more efficient production methods. A lot of final assembly time will be cut by using the composite fuselage barrels. Airbus used to have a price advantage over Boeing by being efficient, Boeing has now took a play from the Airbus play book and turned the tables.
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:49 pm

Quoting NorCal (Reply 26):
Quoting Joni (Reply 15):
QF said the key difference was earlier availability, in terms of performance and price the planes were very close.

Not true, read the press release from QF

Mr Dixon said the B787's lighter fuselage, which was constructed from composite material, allowed the aircraft to:

* fly further with a full payload;
* burn less fuel;
* fly faster than any other aircraft of its size; and
* reduce maintenance costs.

We discussed this press release back when it was made, and you should pay attention to the fact that Dixon is comparing the 787 to their current 767s, not the A350:

"Its new technology engines, cutting-edge airframe and increased seat count also offer a significant reduction in costs per ASK compared to the current Boeing 767."

Quoting NorCal (Reply 26):
Also not true, the reason why the 787 is being offered at a lower price is because of more efficient production methods.

Well that's what Boeing says, of course. I haven't seen any analytical comparisons between the A350 and B787 production processes what would indicate the 787 is cheaper to build - the logistics are even more daunting than with Airbus' method since huge parts are e.g. shipped across the Pacific.

The subsidies, on the other hand, do always help and specifically allow Boeing to sell their plane substantially cheaper than they could without them.
 
norcal
Posts: 1507
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 1:44 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:09 am

Quoting Joni (Reply 27):

Please, the order books speak for themselves. Also the comments from the two largest leasing companies in the world aren't exactly a ringing endorsement of the A350. Once the A350 was introduced, the rate at which customers signed up for the 787 increased substantially.

Quoting Joni (Reply 27):
The subsidies, on the other hand, do always help and specifically allow Boeing to sell their plane substantially cheaper than they could without them.

Airbus gets its own subsidies in the form of launch aide. The difference is in the production methods, which mirror Airbus' in many ways (747LCF = Beluga). The composite barrels are where a lot of the savings will be because it will cut down on a lot of final assembly time (greatly reduced number of rivets and fasteners) in Seattle where the biggest costs are incurred.
 
NAV20
Posts: 8453
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2003 3:25 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:15 am

Quoting Joni (Reply 27):
Well that's what Boeing says, of course.

Thanks, Joni. Perfectly clear that Dixon and the other guys at Qantas are just gullible idiots who didn't do their homework and believed anything Boeing cared to tell them - otherwise they'd have bought scads of A350s.......

Didn't realise that until you explained it.  Smile
"Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards.." - Leonardo da Vinci
 
Joni
Posts: 2613
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2000 11:05 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:20 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 29):

Thanks, Joni. Perfectly clear that Dixon and the other guys at Qantas are just gullible idiots who didn't do their homework and believed anything Boeing cared to tell them - otherwise they'd have bought scads of A350s.......

Huh? Dixon and his staff at Qantas are of course only too happy to benefit from the largesse of US, Japanese and Italian taxpayers.

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 29):
Didn't realise that until you explained it.

(i'm afraid you didn't quite realize it even then...  Smile )
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 13827
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 12:52 am

Quote:
Moreover, it's unclear how Airbus would finance R&D for a more-expensive A350 without loans from European governments.

They'd go to banks and ask for loans, just like Boeing does? We keep hearing about the gorgeous profits Airbus is contributing to EADS, well, it's now time to re-invest some of them.
Inspiration, move me brightly!
 
User avatar
ClassicLover
Posts: 3940
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:27 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:04 am

Quoting Joni (Reply 30):
Huh? Dixon and his staff at Qantas are of course only too happy to benefit from the largesse of US, Japanese and Italian taxpayers.

Whaaaaat?

Apparently the offers were very similar - so if Qantas had chosen the 350, you would be saying that QF was only too happy to benefit from the largesse of the EU taxpayers?!

What a comment!
I do quite enjoy a spot of flying - more so when it's not in Economy!
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:28 am

Quoting Leelaw (Reply 14):
Actually, isn't the official name: Airbus SAS? Technically, I don't think "Airbus" can be considered a "division" of EADS as it's not a wholly-owned by them, but that's just me being anal.

By U.S. and E.U. law, they are majority-owned and thus must be accounted as a division. This isn't universal—in Japan, the largest shareholder with more than 33% would count a company as a division.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
JayinKitsap
Posts: 627
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 9:55 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:35 am

I laugh when I see the Washington State is subsidizing Boeing. The legislature here passed some revised laws to level the playing field for aerospace companies compared to South Carolina and Texas. These are:

Washington charges sales tax in the 8.5% range on all construction and equipment (including the installation costs). Washington revised the law to allow "Aerospace Manufacturing" to not pay sales taxes on this construction. RR or AirBus or any of their subs are allowed this credit.

Washington has the most horrible Workmen's Comp system with Sky High costs. This was revised also for "Aerospace Manufacturing" that put it more in line with the competing states.

Washington also agreed to not hit up Boeing again for "Growth Impacts" like they had done several times in the past. When Boeing built Everett they were required to build several miles of freeway to the plant. When the added the 777 line, they were forced to pay to upgrade a bunch of freeways, even though the increased traffic on the freeway they built before was due to general growth not Boeing Employment. Boeing was just livid.

In all, Washington just levelled the playing field to what anybody gets and pays in the South to locate a plant there.

-Jay
 
Dougloid
Posts: 7248
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2005 2:44 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:37 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
profit. They can both get what they want.

What Airbus should do is introduce a new type between the A359 and the A380. The A346 is nice, but even with an A346E there is too much of a size gap between it and the A380.

Jeez, Thorben-here I am not arguing with you.


I think that is the right answer too, but the folks at Airbus are between a rock and a hard place right now trying to simultaneously develop the A380, A350 and A400M. It's a case of trying to do too much at one and the same time.
Even assuming that they can capture a lot of the development money by using existing work on the A350 they've still got a lot on their plate right now in terms of money they have to come up with and engineering work hours that have to be applied to problem solving.

As I recall from what we heard at the plant, the development money for the MD11 was about 5-6 billion USD of the mid 1980s variety, and that, of course was a DC10 derivative. Douglas figured that they'd have to deliver 450-plus aircraft to start making some serious returns on the investment. They were also stretched pretty thin engineering wise developing the C17 and MD11 at the same time. The C17 development was government funded of course-and I'm guessing it had to be 8-10 billion USD.

Airbus has that much on their plate and more-I do not think that they could tackle another big project right now. Any way you slice it, the A380 has cost them a lot of cash to get it this far, and more will be needed. Likewise the A350 and A400M.

The prospects are a little better for Boeing, as they only have two big projects under way. The 747-8 is going to cost them at least as much to develop as the MD11 cost Douglas-they will not get out of this cheaply, so look for them to really beat the bush for orders.

Farnborough ought to be very interesting, methinks.
 Smile
If you believe in coincidence, you haven't looked close enough-Joe Leaphorn
 
trex8
Posts: 4601
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2002 9:04 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:51 am

does Airbus actually have to worry about finding R & D money for the A400M since its a military project, won't that be already funded by the customers?? I can see engineering resources being scarce but it would be an odd military project to expect the prime to have to come up with R & D money unless its a weird EU thing.
 
A319XFW
Posts: 1519
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 5:41 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:01 am

Quoting NAV20 (Reply 9):
That's what most people - including people who work there - still call it, PM. Still, thanks for the correction - I'll call it BAE SYSTEMS if you in your turn will stop using the informal term 'Airbus' and instead refer henceforward to 'the Airbus Division of the European Aeronautics, Defence, and Space Company.' NV

Actually, people at BAE call it BAE..... Big grin
But the official writing should be "BAE SYSTEMS" and all in capitals.
I'm sure Astuteman can clarify this once and for all, seeing as he works for "Guns and ammo" Big grin
 
Ken777
Posts: 9046
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 5:39 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 2:44 am

I don't see the 350 being delayed in order to turn it into the 360. We seem to be in an up-swing of orders for the 787/350 market. It might be because Boeing introduced the 7E7 and got orders moving - just like the 380 caused a flow of new orders because it was a new concept. Regardless, Airbus needs a plane to sell now and that is going to need to be the 350.

While I think Boeing will have the advantage with the 787 Airbus will have a plane that will be able to get orders. It's basically a 330 (which isn't a bad plane) with more efficient engines, enhancements to an already excellent wing and lots of weight saving modifications. Airbus can sell it - especially when pushing that it fits right in with the airlines 330 fleet.

When the 350 and 380 are out the door and the initial operational fine tuning is completed then it will be time for Airbus to get to work on their future. They need to look at Boeing's Y1 thru Y3 plans and come up with their own "Z1" thru "Z3" plans, covering everything from a 320 replacement to a 777 "killer". The 380 will have it's own market and the 350 will be able to fill the customer's needs until the Z's hit the market.

Changing the 350 would be a dream come true for the Boeing sales guys. I can hear the comments now: "When are they going to stop changing the mind and start delivering?" "How many more 350s are they going to design before they figure out what to do?" "How can they deliver a plane to you if they don't even know what it's going to be?" "350 stands for the number of versions the design will go through before someone decides it's time to actually build a plane." Yep, Boeing would love it.
 
kaitak
Posts: 8943
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 1999 5:49 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:21 am

What can Airbus actually do to the A350 that can give it any advantage over the 787? Unless it can physically widen the aircraft, it seems that the company will just be throwing good money after bad. And what about the effect on deliveries, not least for those like AY who have recently ordered the aircraft?

On another issue, I've heard reports that the 787 windows were to be reduced to normal size - much to my disappointment, as this was a feature I was particularly looking forward to. Please say it ain't so and that they are still committed to a larger window! (Anyone know how much bigger they will be?)
 
User avatar
N328KF
Posts: 5810
Joined: Tue May 25, 2004 3:50 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:24 am

Quoting Kaitak (Reply 39):
On another issue, I've heard reports that the 787 windows were to be reduced to normal size - much to my disappointment, as this was a feature I was particularly looking forward to. Please say it ain't so and that they are still committed to a larger window! (Anyone know how much bigger they will be?)

Why does this rumor keep showing up? Boeing has actually cut sample fuselage barrels with the enlarged window size, and they keep illustrating that size in marketing information, and yet the rumor persists. It must be the Leahy-Keesje media axis.
When they call the roll in the Senate, the Senators do not know whether to answer 'Present' or 'Not guilty.' -Theodore Roosevelt
 
airfrnt
Posts: 2002
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:36 am

Quoting Leelaw (Thread starter):
Sources in London told ATWOnline yesterday that Udvar-Hazy's comments in Orlando may have been promoted by those within Airbus who desire an all-new aircraft to combat not only the Dreamliner but the 777, which eclipsed the A340 family last year.

I stand by my speculation yesterday that given Udvar-Hazy's close relationship with Leahy, Leahy may be behind these comments. That may be Leahy just CYAing (it's not my fault the plane ain't selling), or he may honestly believe that they need a better plane. Either way, Udvar-Hazy's relationship with Leahy is going to lead a lot of insiders to suspect that Leahy engineered this. If so, Leahy will either win, or he will be out at airbus.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
Airbus shouldn't overhaul the A350. When people talk of the sales difference between it and the 787 they tend to neglect that the latter could be ordered two years earlier.

Even taking that into account, you need to realize that
a) A lot of carriers waited for Airbus to respond. In fact they waited through three iterations of Airbus's all to conservitive response.
b) Even after the A350 in it's current form was introduced Boeing is still outselling Airbus, even after early delivery slots are gone.
c) Boeing actually has picked up more orders since the A350 was announced then before. Everyone was waiting to see what Airbus has done.
 
airfrnt
Posts: 2002
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 2:05 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:40 am

Quote:

The tide seems to have changed as the 787 claims market share. Industry sources have suggested that the GECAS and ILFC orders contain caveats requiring Airbus to meet certain order and customer milestones. Key launch customer Qatar Airways, which announced a commitment in Paris to order 60 A350 family aircraft (ATWOnline, June 14, 2005), still has not inked the deal and some suggest that its order is conditional on Emirates signing up as well.

From my experience, whenever contract details (and particular cancelation details) start leaking out, it's yet another form of a threat. I think QR will go ahead and order the A350, but ILFC or GECAS pulling out on the A350 would be even more disasterous then the SQ pullout from the DC-10/MD-11.
 
abrelosojos
Posts: 4050
Joined: Sun May 29, 2005 6:48 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:44 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
Boeing can do that since the Japanese government and the state of Washington pays them enough to produce planes.

= Lets just be clear on who starts the B vs. A crap.

-A.
Live, and let live.
 
BoomBoom
Posts: 2459
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 3:51 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
When people talk of the sales difference between it and the 787 they tend to neglect that the latter could be ordered two years earlier.

This excuse is getting rather old.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):
In competitions such as the ones at QR (where the A350 won) or QF (where the 787 won because of a lower price) the A350 showed that it can compete with the 787.

What kind of deal did Airbus have to give QR to get them to take the A350?

Quote:
Last year, Boeing trounced Airbus on wide-body sales, with 447 net orders to Airbus' 193. The 787 and 777 far outsold the A350 and A340.

The continuing Boeing dominance has shaken confidence in Airbus' midsize wide-body strategy among major customers.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm....html



Quoting Joni (Reply 27):
The subsidies, on the other hand, do always help and specifically allow Boeing to sell their plane substantially cheaper than they could without them.

Tell it to the WTO. Airbus gets all the same subsidies that Boeing gets: defense contracts, tax favors, local government infrastructure improvements, etc. In addition Airbus gets launch aid.
Our eyes are open, our eyes are open--wide, wide, wide...
 
Thorben
Posts: 2713
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2005 10:29 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:47 am

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 46):
This excuse is getting rather old.

Just wait two more years, compare the sales then.

Quoting BoomBoom (Reply 46):
What kind of deal did Airbus have to give QR to get them to take the A350?

The better product is what they gave them.

Besides, the Seatle times is not a neutral source. They talk of "The continuing Boeing dominance". They shouldn't forget where Boeing was a couple of years ago and they are just a little B. cheerleader, which is understandable. Anyway, who is selling more planes, who is making more profit?
France 1789; Eastern Germany 1989; Tunisia 2011; Egypt 2011
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:55 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 4):

What Airbus should do is introduce a new type between the A359 and the A380. The A346 is nice, but even with an A346E there is too much of a size gap between it and the A380.

I've been suggesting for a long time that Airbus should consider this approach.

Quoting Thorben (Reply 7):
Boeing can do that since the Japanese government and the state of Washington pays them enough to produce planes.

This is completely false. The Japanese government subsidized some of the R&D of technologies and manufacturing techniques that are being used to produce components for the B787. The Japanese government does not pay Boeing (or any Boeing subcontractor) to produce B787s or parts thereof. The State of Washington has never subsidized Boeing in any way, shape, or form. Lowering taxes is not a subsidy. Taxes themselves are for subsidizing and should always be lowered.

Quoting Joni (Reply 27):
I haven't seen any analytical comparisons between the A350 and B787 production processes what would indicate the 787 is cheaper to build - the logistics are even more daunting than with Airbus' method since huge parts are e.g. shipped across the Pacific.

Shipping large assemblies across the Pacific is less logistically daunting than driving them around Europe.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 31):
They'd go to banks and ask for loans, just like Boeing does?

Of course, Airbus and Boeing should pay market rates for capital. The government should not be subsidizing anyone, ever, with low-interest loans or in any other way.

Quoting Abrelosojos (Reply 44):
Lets just be clear on who starts the B vs. A crap.

It started before most A.netters were born. Since then, the Airbus and Boeing cheerleaders have been throwing mud back and forth. It's way too late to worry about who started what. Each of us needs to take responsibility for our own words and not blame others for "starting something."
 
BR076
Posts: 1032
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 4:10 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 4:59 am

Quoting Zvezda (Reply 53):
It started before most A.netters were born.

is it already 15 years this way  eyepopping 
ú
 
zvezda
Posts: 8891
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2004 8:48 pm

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:15 am

Quoting BR076 (Reply 54):

is it already 15 years this way

Were most A.netters born 15 years ago?
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Some At Airbus May Be Behind Udvar-Hazy Comments

Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:43 am

Quoting Thorben (Reply 50):
The better product is what they gave them.

There is no possible way to defend this statement. Simply put, the A350 is not and is incapable of being made a superior product to the 787 without a complete overhaul. It is many, many tons lighter and there's nothing you can do to get around that. Nothing. At all.

What the A350 could be is a "good enough" product to both generate sales and benefit some customers. Due to Airbus' superior production skills, it could also be manufactured at a cost that can be converted to low sale prices while still maintaining profitability for Airbus. Lower sale prices can make the plane more cost effective to operate over a certain period of time than a 787.

Feel free to argue that the A350 is a good plane, it is. Feel free to argue that it will sell, because it will. You could even argue its more cost effective than a 787, because Airbus could make that true.

But you can't rationally argue that it is a superior product, because it simply is not. Airbus knows it. What they do about it remains to be seen.

N

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: aerlingus747, AsiaTravel, Baidu [Spider], beachba, deltal1011man, Google [Bot], KarelXWB, N14AZ, Prost, rutankrd, sdbelgium, shankly, SomebodyInTLS, SteinarN, supremeimages, Yahoo [Bot] and 263 guests