Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
jblake1
Posts: 262
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2003 10:25 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:13 am

UPS will not be purchasing the A380 since their largest hub in the United States SDF (Louisville, KY) airport has no plans to upgrade their facilities to handle the big bus.

In fact they are even reducing the number of 747's they fly replacing them with MD11's.
 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:29 am

I doubt that any passenger version of the A380 will be sold in the US, they should be thinking how to survive. But then the US government will probably give some money to help them out! Now that is fair competition!
 
yul332LX
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:15 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:31 am

Most US airlines are run very inefficiently.
Debatable, some may agree, many won't.


We could argue a long time about US airlines's efficiency but one thing is sure: they are less efficient than most major carriers outside North-America.

However, it doesn't mean that those US airlines would (will) be more efficient by ordering and operating the A380s. Different markets, different needs.







E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
 
squad55
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 3:12 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:33 am

There was an article in our internal website (UPS) stating there are no plans on ordering any A380's. It states our current fleet arrangment fits our needs perfectly. There is no need for added volume with the A380. We do more volume than Fedex even though we have 56 less aircraft.
 
squad55
Posts: 251
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2001 3:12 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 3:40 am

Also I think the topic of this thread is very misleading. How is it a shocker that Airbus is in talks with US airlines for A380's. Airbus can talk all they want to any airline, doesn't mean they will buy them..... In fact I would be shocked if Airbus DIDN'T talk to US airlines about the A380. All they are trying to do is sell right....

And in regards to the UPS A300F deal, the official UPS response to that rumor was it had no plans on canceling their order. However I do remember an article awhile ago stating they wanted to. Can anyone officially confirm this??
 
N766UA
Posts: 8376
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 1999 3:50 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:52 am

A shocker that Airbus is talking to US airlines? Gimme a break. When a major US airline buys 50 of them, that'll be a shocker. Otherwise, just business as usual.
 
Guest

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:04 am

Hmmm... Why are you conveniently left out the 767?

because most of the routes operated by US 767's will be operated by A330/777's by their European rivals, not a 744.

LHR-JFK is the busiest trans Oceanic route. UA and AA don't use any 744, even though UA has a large 744 fleet.

and its also only 3000nm's, as you know the shorter the sector the more important frequency becomes.

FWIW, according to Boeing, the 744 still costs around 10% less than the 772ER on a per seat basis.

well they arent going to tell everyone their own prduct is shit.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 3668
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:13 am

Isn't it odd how the 7E7 has been out for like a month and a half and has nearly half the orders of the A380, which has been out for something like 5 years?

Isn't it odd some people have to bring in the B7E7 on every single A380 topic?

Have they still not understood the A380 is a plane, built to complete the product range of Airbus by giving the leading plane manufacturer a top product just like the B747, whereas the B7E7 is in fact just the future basic Boeing wide body model, replacing their outdated B767?

If you don't understand this difference and absolutely want to compare apples with oranges, than I suppose you must find it equally worrying to see even the biggest B7E7 order is not even a quarter of some EMB135/145 orders!  Wow!


 
aussie747
Posts: 1017
Joined: Thu Aug 14, 2003 11:15 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:32 am

I can't help but think would UA have ordered the A380 at about this point in time if it were not in Ch 11? It could benefit from it's synergies with the A320.

I know this is quite a debatable topic given another popular thread on why they purchased the A320 in the first place.

On a whole I do not think a US pax carrier will be purchasing it soon given the current trend or frequency over larger airfames.
 
yul332LX
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:15 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:40 am

I don’t think commonality is important in this case. UA does not operate 330/340 and pilots won't jump from the A320/319 to the A380...
E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:27 am


because most of the routes operated by US 767's will be operated by A330/777's by their European rivals, not a 744.


US airlines have been using the 763ER to replace the 747 on the trans-Atlantic flights since 1986. The 772 wasn't available until 1995. So, US carriers had been using 763ERs to compete with the 747 on the trans-Atlantic routes for nearly ten years before the arrival of the 772. Also, the 330 and 777 are larger than the 767 and have lower unit operating cost, but US carriers are still not pressured into using the larger aircraft.


and its also only 3000nm's, as you know the shorter the sector the more important frequency becomes.


Care to check the schedule? I believe no airlines have more than one daylight flight from JFK. All the other flights leave JFK in the late evening within two to three hours of each other, and LHR is the most slot constrained airport.


well they arent going to tell everyone their own prduct is shit


What does the statement I made have anything to do with this? The 744 is a larger aircraft than the 772, so it has lower overhead, as a result, lower unit cost. I am just stating what I have seen. The fact is it's a comparsion between two Boeing products, then it's less likely to be tainted. The point is lower unit cost doesn't mean it will benefit everyone.


Isn't it odd some people have to bring in the B7E7 on every single A380 topic?


Airbus chose to invest in the 380. Boeing could invest in a 380 equivalent, but they didn't and chose to invest in the 7e7. So, it's a valid comparison of who might have invested more wisely. They each invested based on their vastly different market outlook. So, it's also a measure of who might have the better forecast model. Like it or not, it's relevant to bring up the 7e7 with the 380. This is a free forum. I don't think you will be able to stop others from comparing the two whether you like it or not.
 
yul332LX
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:15 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:35 am

US airlines have been using the 763ER to replace the 747 on the trans-Atlantic flights since 1986. The 772 wasn't available until 1995. So, US carriers had been using 763ERs to compete with the 747 on the trans-Atlantic routes for nearly ten years before the arrival of the 772.

Not really. To replace earlier versions of the 747, they have used the DC-10/MD-11 more than the 763ER.
E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:39 am


Not really. To replace earlier versions of the 747, they have used the DC-10/MD-11 more than the 763ER.


That's not what I was referring to. I was talking about on the trans-Atlantic routes. Before the 762ER and 763ER, trans-Atlantic routes were mostly served by the 747. Since the 762ER, the 767 has beome the major workhorse on the trans-Atlantic routes.
 
nosedive
Posts: 2176
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 2:18 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:44 am

Have they still not understood the A380 is a plane, built to complete the product range of Airbus by giving the leading plane manufacturer a top product just like the B747, whereas the B7E7 is in fact just the future basic Boeing wide body model, replacing their outdated B767?

Well I think the 2 aircraft will compete. Granted, it won't be a competition between the airliners exactly, as both are in different classes, but the two will compete, as both represent different theories of air travel.

The A380 represents the that bigger is better, and also will most likely be filled off of feeder traffic. For example, if 2 airports (say Bob Int'l and Jack Int'l) have about a 400 Pax O/D daily traffic(200 each way...just to keep the math easy), and are about 6000 miles away from one another, it wouldn't make much sense for an airline to put a 330/777/340/747 on this route. So the passengers from each airport would most likely be funneled into a hub, and put on a much larger plane. But when slot restraints come into play, one major key to the "appeal" of the A380, and especially at hubs, 3 A380 may serve an airline better than 4 or 5 747s (yes I know this is a quite high number of seats, but bear with me). Ergo, an airline may find it easier to have the passengers from Bob Int'l fly to its major hub, board an A380, and fly to Jack Int'l, all in the name of saving slots.

The 7E7, on the other hand, would have passengers at Bob Int'l fly nonstop to Jack Int'l. And all this sounds fine and dandy, until either Bob Int'l and/or Jack Int'l is also slot restricted.

IMO: Both airliners will do well, but as the hub/spoke system is becoming more of a hassle, I see the 7E7 selling more planes. But, as this would fill up a few more precious slots at major airports, I see the A380 coming in, with less frequency, but with the same number of seats, to help remedy the problem. In any case, we'll have to wait at least 10 years, as by then both these planes will be up in the sky with some reasonable numbers...
 
Guest

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:46 am

Care to check the schedule? I believe no airlines have more than one daylight flight from JFK. All the other flights leave JFK in the late evening within two to three hours of each other, and LHR is the most slot constrained airport.

thats because LHR has a curfew 11 - around 6 or 7 in the morning. notice that BA operate hourly flights for 5odd hours when the takeoff and landing times are not in the middle of the night.

US airlines have been using the 763ER to replace the 747 on the trans-Atlantic flights since 1986. The 772 wasn't available until 1995. So, US carriers had been using 763ERs to compete with the 747 on the trans-Atlantic routes for nearly ten years before the arrival of the 772. Also, the 330 and 777 are larger than the 767 and have lower unit operating cost, but US carriers are still not pressured into using the larger aircraft.

who cares Dynskrisolo all i said was

No doubt US airlines will be put under pressure when foreign airlines begin competing on their routes with the A380. They could reduce prices and/or increase the comfort level especially in the first and business class section, drawing customers away from airlines not using the A380. This may swing some airlines into buying the A380.

Airlines flying the A380 will benefit from lower seat per mile costs and will therefore be able to charge lower prices or offer more seat space. Thus it is inevitable competing airlines not using the A380 on these routes will feel pressure. If you want to patronise me by questioning a variety of different scenarios getting completely off topic, then knock yourself but i really cant be arsed to reply to your comments any more.
 
eastbay
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 2:44 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:51 am

My guess is that VirginUSA will operate a fleet of 380's SFO-LAX hourly
 
yul332LX
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:15 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:51 am

Nosedive,

Interesting post but following your reasoning, the 767 and the 744 are competitors right now! Do you think US airlines, or any airlines for that matters, ever considered those planes as competing each other? I don't think they did or at least, not in an extensive way!

E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
 
MMEPHX
Posts: 143
Joined: Mon Mar 29, 2004 10:54 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:10 am

Could it be NW to replace/supplement the 747 freighters they have??
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:28 am


who cares Dynskrisolo all i said was

...

Airlines flying the A380 will benefit from lower seat per mile costs and will therefore be able to charge lower prices or offer more seat space.


The 744 has exactly the same advantage when compared to smaller long-haul aircraft like the 767. I am just pointing out historical lesson. If you don't care, that's fine by me.


Thus it is inevitable competing airlines not using the A380 on these routes will feel pressure.


And you think VS will not use the 380 between LHR and JFK? I hoep you are not serious.


the 767 and the 744 are competitors right now! Do you think US airlines, or any airlines for that matters, ever considered those planes as competing each other


They don't compete directly, but the 767 has proven to be an attractive alternative to the 747 on the trans-Atlantic routes. Airlines choose to use the 767 as their long-haul backbone, then they will have more extensive secondary routes, thus, fragmentation. Airlines chose to use larger planes as their long-haul backbone, then they will have networks with more hub to hub or hub to major cities routes. It won't be feasible or effective to use smaller planes on the hub-dominant type of network, and vice versa. So, they do compete, just not in the typical sense that you have in mind.

 
USairways16BWI
Posts: 921
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 4:58 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:41 am

usairways could sell all of their planes and get 10 A380's! LOL. yea right
 
N670UW
Posts: 1443
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2003 9:55 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:44 am

Airlines flying the A380 will benefit from lower seat per mile costs and will therefore be able to charge lower prices or offer more seat space.

This may benefit the airline, but probably not the consumer. Just because an airline can offer more space or a lower fare, doesn't necessarily mean they will. With that, the airline operating the smaller aircraft have no disadvantage relative to the other airline.


R
 
ConcordeBoy
Posts: 16852
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2001 8:04 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:47 am

AA was looking at A345/A346s (maybe only to lower the price if they ever order B777NGs)

AA allegedly placed an LOI for A345 at the Asian Aerospace 2000 show, but it was for the purpose of expressing their disdain at GE90-exclusivity rather than playing the price game.

I've never even heard of AA being interested in A346, or 773ER for that matter. They did however, come close to purchasing a small fleet of 773As for ORD/JFK-LHR. That however, was nixed in the 11th hour.



I can't help but think would UA have ordered the A380 at about this point in time if it were not in Ch 11? It could benefit from it's synergies with the A320

And what synergies would that be?

Other than cockpit resemblance, there isnt much in common between the two; and do you seriously think that UA narrowbody pilots would operate A32x on Tues/Thurs and then fly A380s Mon/Wed/Fridays?  Big grin



Airlines flying the A380 will benefit from lower seat per mile costs and will therefore be able to charge lower prices or offer more seat space. Thus it is inevitable competing airlines not using the A380 on these routes will feel pressure.

Sorry bub, but Dynkrisolo is correct on this point, with history (alongside fact) to back him up. If lower seat cost were the say-all-to-end-all, you'd still see nothing but 747s over the water.
Faire du ciel le plus bel endroit de la terre c'est impossible sans Concorde!
 
nosedive
Posts: 2176
Joined: Sun May 23, 2004 2:18 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 10:19 am

YUL, the 747 and 767 aren't "competitors" b/c of range and CASM. The 762 can do LHR-CGK nonstop, as implied on boeing.com, a flight of about 11722km. And the flight is almost to the range limit, 12,220 of the 762. The 744ER has a range of 14,205km: nearly a 2000km difference. That's about a 2hr and 20min difference in flight time for either plane. The 747 also has a lower CASM than the 767. Because of this, many airlines use the 767 on transcon, as is the case in the US, and "shorter" longhauls (i.e. LON-IAD), as the task suits the 767 well, and often better than the 747.

So why would be the A380 and the 7E7 "compete"? Here's where my reasoning, stolen from both Boeing and Airbus, comes into play. BOTH Range and CASM differences are reduced. The 7E7-8, as reported by Boeinghttp://www.boeing.com/commercial/7e7/background.html, will have a range close to 15,700 km, just shy of 1500 km above the 747! And the 7E7, as boasted by Boeing, will have a 20% better fuel consumption rate, an 8% efficiency jump from the engines alone, and 40-60% increase in cargo capacity. All these things, as Boeing suggests, will curtail into "a a super-efficient airplane" (Boeing's words, not mine). The A380, as reported by Airbus, will have a 15,000 km range, carry 200 PAX more (at least, probably) than the 7E7, "increase an operator%92s return by as much as 35%" (Airbus' word, not mine http://www.airbus.com/product/a380_economics.asp, and have "The net results are operating costs that are between 15% and 20% lower than on any competitor aircraft" (guess who's words these are).

Obviously enough Airbus implies that their competition is the 747, but the point here is that both aircraft will have nearly identical ranges, and closer CASM -as the costs will be lowered from greater efficiency- than the 767/747 example.

So what does this all mean? As I stated above, Granted, it won't be a competition between the airliners exactly, as both are in different classes, but the two will compete, as both represent different theories of air travel. And I gave examples of how the A380 favors the hub/spoke system and how the 7E7 favors the Point2Point system. What will ultimately drive this competition are 2 things, restrictions and, as Adam Smith taught us in 1776, the market. And the market here consists of 2 factions. A) The airline, who will make the choice between the 2 theories as B) the passengers want. And as point to point and increased frequency continues to develop, it would seem that the 7E7 would have the upper hand, BUT what about slots and frequency? More frequencies mean the airport inches closer to its air-traffic capacity. And ultra long-haul thin routes flown nonstop do have an appeal to the passenger, but if this theory becomes saturated it may impede of the limitations of the airport, especially if one, or both, airports are hub airports. The A380 provides some relief to the traditional hub by cutting the number of frequencies (while maintaining the same number of seats), but many passengers do not like the idea of connections, especially if this transitions into a longer layover, as I've implied.

And that's why I think both airliners will do fine. Point2point and increased frequencies will be more and more popular, but at the expense of slots. Furthermore, P2P will never fully eliminate hubs, as many hubs have proven to rather efficient to the airline and cities will hubs generally like their hub. Yet hubs are already neap capacity, thus they'll need a larger aircraft to help relieve some of the stress.
 
xaphan
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:09 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 11:58 am

I vote for UPS, tho NW might be a possibility. SDF has a massive UPS cargo facility that is almost brand new and there is still some room for expansion. Perhaps more importantly, SDF has received Federal authority to lengthen it's already fairly long primary runway enough to allow UPS to operate non-stop SDF to the Orient with full loads in summer which they can not at this time do. All UPS flights must stop and ANC. Along with the A300 issue it seems to make sense for UPS to go for the A380 especially since FedEx has already taken the lead.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 3668
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 2:51 pm

Dynkrisolo,

Airbus chose to invest in the 380. Boeing could invest in a 380 equivalent, but they didn't and chose to invest in the 7e7. So, it's a valid comparison of who might have invested more wisely. They each invested based on their vastly different market outlook. So, it's also a measure of who might have the better forecast model. Like it or not, it's relevant to bring up the 7e7 with the 380. This is a free forum. I don't think you will be able to stop others from comparing the two whether you like it or not

Airbus recently invested in multiple market segments to create a homogeneous modern range of products starting with a 100-seater (A318) and completes it by a top product to compete with the aging B747-400.
I do not see how you can measure who has the better forecast model: Airbus, designing a whole range of new planes to make sure they offer the most advanced plane in EVERY single category, or Boeing, who has an aging product line on all categories and has picked only one category to modernize...

[Edited 2004-06-14 07:53:45]
 
Guest

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 4:15 pm

Sorry bub, but Dynkrisolo is correct on this point, with history (alongside fact) to back him up. If lower seat cost were the say-all-to-end-all, you'd still see nothing but 747s over the water

so you're telling me that if an airline begins offering lower prices on a route or a more desirable product, the competing airlines will feel no pressure at all?

I never said other airlines would have to use the A380, i just said they would feel pressure! Its not a very difficult concept to grasp.

[Edited 2004-06-14 09:37:53]
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 5:17 pm

>> "Isn't it odd how the 7E7 has been out for like a month and a half and has nearly half the orders of the A380, which has been out for something like 5 years?" <<

Something tells me I am going to end up repeating myself. The 7E7 and A380 are different planes, by different companies made for different markets. Not different market forecasts. Any company in any field will research how much demand there is for their products, they do not care for the product itself. Boeing sees its forecasted market as ranged point-to-point. Airbus sees its forecasted market as a bigger plane will be needed. It is not a niche product. Both are right, both will win, why? DIFFERENT MARKETS! They each have the monopoly of their perspective markets, at least until one overlaps the other.

Like someone said about their ranges, nearly alike, 7E7 has around half [the pax load compared to] what A380 will have on those routes. At this point, no conclusion can be made as we do not have the data from that future route. Anyone making a decision on that particular is being ignorant for sure.

It pains me to see some folks who think that if an international product does not succeed in the States then it is a failure. In the case of A380, I do not think it was design to succeed within the USA, but then there is a whole world out there.

Aren't the official stats regarding air travel, on average, increasing at 2% annually internationally and 4% within the USA? Those people have got to go somewhere. IMO, frequency => traffic => delays which probably is not the best business choice.

But if you have the money and time...I feel sorry for you.


[Edited 2004-06-14 10:36:47]
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 5:29 pm

Airbus recently invested in multiple market segments to create a homogeneous modern range of products

Right, and Boeing hasn't? Forgetting the 717, 737NG, 7E7 (now that the 757/767 is ending), 777, 744/744ER/747X?  Insane

starting with a 100-seater (A318) and completes it by a top product to compete with the aging B747-400.

Actually Boeing was the first to develop that modern 100-seater, it's called the 717 if you haven't noticed.

And, the A380 competing with the 744? Bullcrap, they are not direct competitors, in fact, the 744 still DOESN'T have a direct competitor.

Oh yeah, 744 aging? Let me see, the 744 is still very modern, does the job very efficiently and with great reliability. I guess by your definitions, the A32X program is now aging, right? They both came out about the same time, the 744 and the A320X family. Little contradiction in your logic........or maybe I should say ignorance.

Airbus, designing a whole range of new planes to make sure they offer the most advanced plane in EVERY single category, or Boeing, who has an aging product line on all categories and has picked only one category to modernize...

This has got to be one of the most idiotic statements to roam the Civil forums these days.



Categories:


737/A320 sized: 737NG is younger, and just as, if not MORE modern and advanced than the A32X family. You think just because the fuselage on the 737NG is basically the same on the 737 classic family, makes it any less modern?

Your argument: FALSE

757/A321: 757 now coming to an end after a very successful 20 years, killing off the "more modern and advanced" A321. Both Boeing and Airbus have not offered anything new for this market.

Your argument: FALSE

767/A332: 767 about to come to end for passenger service, being replaced by the 7E7. The A330 has gradually killed off 767 sales, but that's already been brought to a halt with the 7E7 being available. Despite hardcore A330 competition, the 767 has still held it's spot as the pure backbone of twin travel.

Your argument: FALSE

A333/A340/777 Sized: The 777 is without a doubt the world's most modern and advanced aircraft. It's newer than the A330/A340 family, it's more advanced.

Your argument: FALSE




So, you seem to think Airbus is the one offering the most modern and advanced aircraft in every category. You just left out one whole side of the coin, that being the 737NG, 7E7, 777, all of which are newer programs than the competing Airbus families.

Your argument: FALSE.

Stop with your anti-Boeing nonsense Sabenapilot, you're definitely the most immature "pilot" I've ever seen.



-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
Guest

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 5:52 pm

NWA742 you have just demonstrated a textbook way to begin an A vrs B war.........Congratulations.

May I ask if you work for an airline and witness all the figures and charts on the aircraft's operating cost and reliability. If you do then I may respect your comments, if you don't then suggest you shut up with your anti-airbus nonsense.

BTW the 737NG isn't even FBW.

not that a more advanced plane necessarily equates to a more economical plane.
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:05 pm

NWA742 you have just demonstrated a textbook way to begin an A vrs B war.........Congratulations.

Actually that would be Sabenapilot with his anti-Boeing ranting...

May I ask if you work for an airline and witness all the figures and charts on the aircraft's operating cost and reliability. If you do then I may respect your comments, if you don't then suggest you shut up with your anti-airbus nonsense.

I don't work for an airline and I don't know every single thing about operating costs, but what I posted is just basic ABC knowledge of commercial aviation, just simple facts. The argument I'm having with Sabena is strictly this, he thinks Airbus offers more modern and advanced aircraft than Boeing in every category but one, and I was using simple well-known FACTS to prove him wrong.

BTW, where did I ever say anything anti-Airbus?

BTW the 737NG isn't even FBW.

Doesn't need to be.


-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
lehpron
Posts: 6846
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2001 3:42 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:16 pm

>> "Actually that would be Sabenapilot with his anti-Boeing ranting..." <<

No bud that would be you, Sabenapilot was not firing at anybody as you were. Throughout this entire thread it was more or less peacefull until you 'got emotional and defensive'. This is how all wars start, somebody gets so pissed off that they feel they must take matters into their own hands, logic goes right out the window. Just calm down, the guy is not attacking you!

[Edited 2004-06-14 11:19:23]
The meaning of life is curiosity; we were put on this planet to explore opportunities.
 
Guest

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 6:19 pm

BTW the 737NG isn't even FBW.

Doesn't need to be.


To be more "technologiacally advanced" like you were arguing it does but as i say operating costs outweighs advancement.

and as you don't know every single thing about operating costs you're in no position to comment.


BTW, where did I ever say anything anti-Airbus?

It was implied throughout the whole post

killing off the "more modern and advanced" A321.
The A330 has gradually killed off 767 sales, but that's already been brought to a halt with the 7E7 being available
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:00 pm


Airbus recently invested in multiple market segments to create a homogeneous modern range of products starting with a 100-seater (A318) and completes it by a top product to compete with the aging B747-400.
I do not see how you can measure who has the better forecast model: Airbus, designing a whole range of new planes to make sure they offer the most advanced plane in EVERY single category, or Boeing, who has an aging product line on all categories and has picked only one category to modernize...


All the developments other than the 380 and 7e7 by both Boeing and Airbus in the past decade have been derivatives which don't cost a lot to develop, relatively speaking. The biggest investment by the two companies at this moment is the 380 and 7e7. Both developments are driven by their market outlook. So, the comparison is relevant, whether you like it or not.


I never said other airlines would have to use the A380, i just said they would feel pressure! Its not a very difficult concept to grasp


And how difficult is to grasp the concept that this won't be the first time airlines face this kind of issue?
 
Guest

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:06 pm

Not difficult at all but given the A380 should be about 15% more fuel efficient per seat than a 744, then add that to your 10% figure (772 vrs 744) that makes 25%. So the airlines will clearly be put under a higher amount of pressure. Thats all ive been trying to say.
 
EAL757
Posts: 176
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:58 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 7:37 pm

the comment was made earlier that with 58 fewer planes, UPS does more volume than FedEx. Interest concept, but are you counting feeder jets? Geez, FedEx flies something like 200 Cessna 208's and an additional 50 or so commuters...each of those carries about 2 boxes and a jar of peanut butter, so your figure is misleading if that's the case.

It also seemed like you were painting the picture of UPS being superior financially to FedEx...not sure that's a wise statement either. FedEx is purchasing like crazy right now--UPS is slowing (I bet they'd love to dump their Airbus order altogether)...in fact, it wouldn't surprise me if UPS took the A300's on order and sold them to FedEx at a discount just because they needed to...that's just a thought though.

-Jeff
 
Adria
Posts: 781
Joined: Wed Aug 09, 2000 7:53 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:02 pm

...........And what synergies would that be?

Other than cockpit resemblance, there isnt much in common between the two; and do you seriously think that UA narrowbody pilots would operate A32x on Tues/Thurs and then fly A380s Mon/Wed/Fridays?......................., well atmost airlines pilots fly the A32x one day and the A330/A340 the other, so if UA should buy the A380 then this could be reality. This is one of the advantiges of Airbus Fly-By-Wire aircraft.

................Sorry bub, but Dynkrisolo is correct on this point, with history (alongside fact) to back him up. If lower seat cost were the say-all-to-end-all, you'd still see nothing but 747s over the water...............

But you see nothing but 747s in Japan







 
upsmd11
Posts: 651
Joined: Sat May 17, 2003 10:56 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:14 pm

UPS has always been a more financially fit company than FedEx, hands down. I do not know about the volume, but I would think they are almost neck to neck if UPS doesn't have a lead.

I won't comment on the A300 issue, we'll just let that run it's course and see what happens. The financial information is public knowledge and you only have to take a few minutes to look at the stockholder information for both companies to see who is better off financially.
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5050
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:51 pm

Aah, I see that NWA742 is up to his old ways again... How I loved the days when he threw his standard hissy fit on 90% of the threads in which Airbus or Boeing were mentioned, be it under his previous screenname. He's so easily riled up  Big grin

Anyway, I'll give my standard response, for old times' sake:

Actually Boeing was the first to develop that modern 100-seater, it's called the 717 if you haven't noticed.

That would be McDonnell Douglas who developed it  Big grin BTW, I don't seem to remember seeing Sabenapilot say anything about the 717 not being developed, he just said Airbus developed the modern A318.

Oh yeah, 744 aging? Let me see, the 744 is still very modern, does the job very efficiently and with great reliability. I guess by your definitions, the A32X program is now aging, right? They both came out about the same time, the 744 and the A320X family.

Apples and oranges. The 747-400 was a modernised 747 Classic, the A320 was an all-new design. You simply can't put all the stuff in a modernised design that you put in an all-new design.

Also, an aircraft's factor of aging depends also largely on the competition: if all the competing aircraft are more modern, a design is aging. Let's look at the 747-400's competitors (and look at it widely, i.e. all currently offered long-haul planes): 777, 7e7, A330, A340, A380. All of these are technologically quite a bit more advanced than the 747-400. And that's not putting the 744 down, it's just a simple fact.

737NG is younger, and just as, if not MORE modern and advanced than the A32X family. You think just because the fuselage on the 737NG is basically the same on the 737 classic family, makes it any less modern?

You seem to confuse 'younger' with 'more modern'. Yes, the 737NG is younger than the A32X. But it's debatable whether it's more modern or not.

757 now coming to an end after a very successful 20 years, killing off the "more modern and advanced" A321.

Sorry, but that's quite simply laughable. Don't you think that, if the 757 had really 'killed off' the A321, the A321 would be the one currently going out of production? Also don't forget that the A321 has only been around half as long as the 757, and, as a quite simple derivative, cost far less to develop. Not to forget that the largest carriers to buy the 757 (US mainline carriers) almost all chose the 757 before the A321 even became available. Or the fact that the 757 was designed with a different market in mind than the A321 (transcontinental US flights vs shorter busy routes).

All of that adds up to the fact that your argument here is... false.

Despite hardcore A330 competition, the 767 has still held it's spot as the pure backbone of twin travel.

How many new customers did the 767 get after the A330-200 became available? When the A330-200 came to the market, 767 sales came to a grinding halt, relatively speaking.

Stop with your anti-Boeing nonsense Sabenapilot, you're definitely the most immature "pilot" I've ever seen.

Now I know you again! Going around personally attacking people because they said something you don't agree with! And then of course you're surprised when you used to end up in fights all the time because people took offense at your personal attack. It got you banned twice in the past, with two of your usernames. You'd think after all that time you'd have learned something...
 
User avatar
RayChuang
Posts: 8139
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2000 7:43 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:08 am

I think what might be happening is that FedEx might be negotiating for additional production slots for the A380-800F in addition to the firm A388F planes they've ordered.

The reason is simple: FedEx wants to be able to between eastern Asia airports such as NRT, the replacement for NGO, and possibly PEK and PVG in China and US airports such as MEM and OAK without having to stop at ANC to refuel. People sometimes forget FedEx has a very large cargo facility at OAK complete with full Federal Inspection Service (US Customs) facilities, and OAK's main runway is long and wide enough to accommodate the A388F easily. I wouldn't be surprised we see 4-5 A388F's operating out of OAK in addition to the A388F's operating out of FedEx's main hub at MEM.
 
yul332LX
Posts: 798
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2004 5:15 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 12:20 am

The argument I'm having with Sabena is strictly this, he thinks Airbus offers more modern and advanced aircraft than Boeing in every category but one, and I was using simple well-known FACTS to prove him wrong.

Think again. Your reply no. 77 is based purely on YOUR opinions. NOT facts.
E volavo, volavo felice più in alto del sole, e ancora più su mentre il mondo pian piano spariva lontano laggiù ...
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:34 am

No bud that would be you, Sabenapilot was not firing at anybody as you were.

Lehpron, Sabenapilot was clearly firing off his anti-Boeing nonsense with his statements, READ THEM:

I do not see how you can measure who has the better forecast model: Airbus, designing a whole range of new planes to make sure they offer the most advanced plane in EVERY single category, or Boeing, who has an aging product line on all categories and has picked only one category to modernize...

That's completely false, since Boeing has families of aircraft just as modern that match Airbus's competing familes. If his statements were true, and all but one of Boeing's aircraft families were old and aging, Boeing would hardly sell a thing these days.

Throughout this entire thread it was more or less peacefull until you 'got emotional and defensive'.

Why am I suddenly being emotional and defensive if I just respond to Sabena's comments? I guess it's ok with you if someone bashes Boeing to no extent without backing themselves up Lehpron, but when someone tries to counter it with facts, that's where the problem starts.  Insane

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To be more "technologiacally advanced" like you were arguing it does but as i say operating costs outweighs advancement.

FBW is not the biggest thing in determining how modern and advanced a commercial airliner is. Besides, it would've probably cost Boeing a lot more to put a FBW system in the 737NG, when it really would not be required. The "old" system works just fine still to this day.

and as you don't know every single thing about operating costs you're in no position to comment

Right, so if I'm not a professional CBA analyst, I can't comment. So, why do you think you can comment at this stage? I smell the word "hypocrite" here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------


Aah, I see that NWA742 is up to his old ways again... How I loved the days when he threw his standard hissy fit on 90% of the threads in which Airbus or Boeing were mentioned, be it under his previous screenname. He's so easily riled up

Hello Scorpio, I'm so glad to see to see you again.  Laugh out loud

I'm not throwing a hissy fit anywhere, I'd like you to point out where the hissy fit is. You seem to be the one getting emotional about this, not me. In "90% of those threads that mentioned Boeing or Airbus", there were constant A vs. B battles between several members, it takes two to argue and to fight, and you could include yourself in there as well.

Oh, and I'm easily riled up? Right, look at yourself here. You were obviously so riled up by my simple post you felt the need to come personally attack me, nice job.

That would be McDonnell Douglas who developed it BTW, I don't seem to remember seeing Sabenapilot say anything about the 717 not being developed, he just said Airbus developed the modern A318.

MDC developed the DC-9, Boeing modernized it completely with the 717. The only thing those two aircraft have in common might be some fuselage parts, but that's about it. Boeing started, and produced the 717, not MDC.

You're right, Sabena was mentioning just the A318, and I simply reminded him that Boeing also has a modern 100-seater, called the 717. That was just a response in his argument that Airbus has more modern planes in every category, and that Boeing's are all old except for one. That argument is completely false.

The 747-400 was a modernised 747 Classic, the A320 was an all-new design. You simply can't put all the stuff in a modernised design that you put in an all-new design.

So what if it's modernized from an old aircraft? Why would Boeing spend unbelievable amounts of money to develop a completely new jumbo when they could completely update the 747? There's nothing wrong with having a modernized aircraft, it doesn't make it any less of a modern plane simply because it shares a few old main parts. Also, from several Boeing engineers' points of view, just about everything but the main fuselage parts CAN be updated.

You guys use this old argument all the time, and it clearly holds no water. Boeing has obviously proved it wrong time and time again.

A quick example:
The 737NG is a modernized classic 737, but it performs right up to the new design of the A32X family. Boeing was smart to not do a new design, because they are capably of modernizing old designs to be able to perform to the same standards as new designs.

Let's look at the 747-400's competitors (and look at it widely, i.e. all currently offered long-haul planes): 777, 7e7, A330, A340, A380. All of these are technologically quite a bit more advanced than the 747-400. And that's not putting the 744 down, it's just a simple fact.

That's a fact, but none of those are direct competitors to the 744. Boeing hasn't updated the 744 because the market for that size is diminishing. Boeing HAS, however, developed more modern and advanced aircraft to compete with Airbus's line of modern products, these being the ones who directly compete, like the A333/A340, 777. 7E7, A332, etc.

Yes, the 737NG is younger than the A32X. But it's debatable whether it's more modern or not.

Yes, it's debatable whether it's more modern or not, but you're forgetting the point of my argument. I'll I'm saying is that Boeing has families of aircraft just as modern as Airbus' competing families. That was the whole point in responding to Sabena.

Don't you think that, if the 757 had really 'killed off' the A321, the A321 would be the one currently going out of production?

No, because the A321 began at a later date, and basically costs Airbus nothing to keep it running if they need to. This will be true as long as they produce the other line of A32X aircraft.

Also don't forget that the A321 has only been around half as long as the 757, and, as a quite simple derivative, cost far less to develop.

Very true, however, since the A321 came out, it really hasn't slowed 757 sales at all. What's slowing 757 sales is the dwindle of the market for that type of aircraft, that's why both Boeing and Airbus are not offering any new projects for that market. The 757 is ending without a replacement, there's probably a reason for it.

How many new customers did the 767 get after the A330-200 became available? When the A330-200 came to the market, 767 sales came to a grinding halt, relatively speaking.

What makes you think I don't know this?? You purposely left out my comment from my previous post:

A330 has gradually killed off 767 sales

The A330 has been getting the sales, but that doesn't dispute the fact that the 767 still remains the common backbone for long twin travel. It's crosses the Atlantic more than any other plane these days I think.

Going around personally attacking people because they said something you don't agree with!

Wasn't really a personal attack, just telling Sabena to look at both sides of the story and to quit posting anti-Boeing nonsense. If I called him an idiot for doing that, that's more of an attack, but I didn't.

It got you banned twice in the past, with two of your usernames. You'd think after all that time you'd have learned something..

Actually, you have no clue as to what got me banned, you are wrong. And speaking of personal attacks, look at what you've said regarding me in your posts. Yeah, I'm the one that needs to learn something from personal attacks.  Insane




-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
gigneil
Posts: 14133
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 10:25 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A

Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:38 am

MDC developed the DC-9, Boeing modernized it completely with the 717. The only thing those two aircraft have in common might be some fuselage parts, but that's about it. Boeing started, and produced the 717, not MDC.

You're incorrect. Despite some alterations by Boeing, this plane is still the MD-95, a wholly MDC developed aircraft.

N
 
BillElliott9
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2003 8:10 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:48 am

I think Nosedive is on the right track regarding NW and freighters...Of course this is based upon the premise that NW is the carrier showing interest.
You can fight without ever winning but never really win without a fight.
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:50 am

You're incorrect. Despite some alterations by Boeing, this plane is still the MD-95, a wholly MDC developed aircraft.

Thanks for the correction.



-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
Guest

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:58 am

Right, so if I'm not a professional CBA analyst, I can't comment. So, why do you think you can comment at this stage? I smell the word "hypocrite" here.

A) I didnt comment
B) I dont care if you're Jesus, if you have never seen proper charts and figures on how the Aircrafts perform and reports on their relibility - not just "20% more efficient" quotes from Boeing or Airbus - you are in no real position to comment on the true quality of the aircraft.

I smell the words "you must live a pretty boring life if you can be arsed write a 1,000+ word reply about two aircraft manufacturors and their planes without profoundly knowing anything about them, whilst bearing in mind the fact that it bears no significance on your life"
 
Scorpio
Posts: 5050
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2001 3:48 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 4:15 am

I'm not throwing a hissy fit anywhere, I'd like you to point out where the hissy fit is.

That's a joke, right? Your entire first post here, maybe? Up untill you came in here things were quite calm. Then you decided it was time to start attacking other posters personally, instead of their points. Qualifies as a hissy fir for most people I'd say...

In "90% of those threads that mentioned Boeing or Airbus", there were constant A vs. B battles between several members,

Almost all of which were started by a certain member named Boeing 747-400, later named the747man, who had a habit of taking things quite personally, and then attacked the users he didn't agree with. Anyone you know, perhaps?  Big grin

Oh, and I'm easily riled up? Right, look at yourself here. You were obviously so riled up by my simple post you felt the need to come personally attack me, nice job.

I didn't call you 'immature', didn't tell you to 'shut up', or any of those. I just pointed out that you were up to your old habits again. If you see that as an attack, then so be it. I'm perfectly calm, BTW. Mainly responded, as I already mentioned before, for old times' sake. And because I knew how you'd react. Guess I'm evil  Laugh out loud

MDC developed the DC-9, Boeing modernized it completely with the 717. The only thing those two aircraft have in common might be some fuselage parts, but that's about it. Boeing started, and produced the 717, not MDC.

Look up 'MD-95'. That should settle this one.

There's nothing wrong with having a modernized aircraft

Never said there was.

That's a fact, but none of those are direct competitors to the 744.

Believe me, they're the main reason the 744 has won so few passenger orders in the last oh what, 10 years...

I didn't say that having a modernised aircraft means it's outdated, but in the case of the 744, ALL its competitors are all-new designs, at LEAST 5 years younger. Relatively speaking, that makes the 744 outdated.

I'll I'm saying is that Boeing has families of aircraft just as modern as Airbus' competing families.

Actually, Boeing doesn't really have a 'family' of aircraft the way Airbus does. Maybe that's what Sabenapilot was referring to?

that's why both Boeing and Airbus are not offering any new projects for that market.

Airbus has a modern one. The A321.

Wasn't really a personal attack, just telling Sabena to look at both sides of the story and to quit posting anti-Boeing nonsense.

You called him the most immature pilot you'd ever seen. If that's not a personal attack, then you have a weird definition of 'personal attack'...

And speaking of personal attacks, look at what you've said regarding me in your posts.

When have I ever been the first to throw personal attacks, if I have, in a thread? I didn't attack you here, just pointed out that your tone is considered quite personal and can start fights.

Yeah, I'm the one that needs to learn something from personal attacks.

One of the first things you've said that I actually agree with.
 
NWA742
Posts: 4505
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2002 11:35 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 5:09 am

B) I dont care if you're Jesus, if you have never seen proper charts and figures on how the Aircrafts perform and reports on their relibility - not just "20% more efficient" quotes from Boeing or Airbus - you are in no real position to comment on the true quality of the aircraft.

I'm not commenting on operating costs and dispatch rates, ok? I'm not going anywhere near that kind of detail. I am in a position to comment on things that I know.

I smell the words "you must live a pretty boring life if you can be arsed write a 1,000+ word reply about two aircraft manufacturors and their planes without profoundly knowing anything about them, whilst bearing in mind the fact that it bears no significance on your life"

It's a slow day at work.

---------------------------------------------------

That's a joke, right? Your entire first post here, maybe? Up untill you came in here things were quite calm. Then you decided it was time to start attacking other posters personally, instead of their points. Qualifies as a hissy fir for most people I'd say...

My post was a simple response to Sabena's, it was not a hissy fit. You're the one getting emotional about this, not me. I attacked Sabena's points, not him. I simply asked him to quit being immature and posting anti-Boeing nonsense, in which, in the statements I responded to from him, were exactly that: immature/nonsense. If you think that's a personal attack, then so be it.

Almost all of which were started by a certain member named Boeing 747-400, later named the747man, who had a habit of taking things quite personally, and then attacked the users he didn't agree with. Anyone you know, perhaps?

didn't call you 'immature', didn't tell you to 'shut up', or any of those. I just pointed out that you were up to your old habits again

Oh BS Scorpio, you're acting like I'm the only one to ever start or participate in an A vs. B war, while you were in there attacking people in A vs. B wars just as much as I was, and you think you have the right to lecture me over it?

Look up 'MD-95'. That should settle this one.

Yes, I stand corrected on that.

Never said there was.

You implied it.

Believe me, they're the main reason the 744 has won so few passenger orders in the last oh what, 10 years...

Can you read? I already said that the 744's market is diminishing because airlines are going for more newer aircraft and more efficient twins. That DOES NOT dispute the fact that there is not a direct competitor to the 744, the others that you mentioned are indirect competitors. Figure it out.

I didn't say that having a modernised aircraft means it's outdated, but in the case of the 744, ALL its competitors are all-new designs, at LEAST 5 years younger. Relatively speaking, that makes the 744 outdated

The 744 being outdated is only your opinion, I don't think it's outdated because it still does the job like a modern airliner. This is going nowwhere, just a difference of opinion.

Actually, Boeing doesn't really have a 'family' of aircraft the way Airbus does.

Why do you think that? Boeing DOES have families of aircraft:

737NG is a modern family of 737s - 736, 73G, 738, 739.

757/767 - family coming to an end, being replaced by 7E7 family, 757 market not being replaced.

7E7 - newest family

777 - modern family of 772, 772ER, 772LR, 773, 773ER

Airbus has a modern one. The A321.

What's your point? Just because the A321 is newer doesn't make it a better performer or a better aircraft for the job than the 757.

You called him the most immature pilot you'd ever seen. If that's not a personal attack, then you have a weird definition of 'personal attack'...

Maybe that's because I felt that a professional pilot having a complete and ignorant bias against another manufacturor of aircraft IS IMMATURE.

I didn't attack you here, just pointed out that your tone is considered quite personal and can start fights.

No, I'd say you attacked me as well. You've been spouting all kinds of false things about me since you started talking to me in this thread. Half of your posts involve attacking my previous usernames instead of debating my points. And you have the nerve to say that my tone is personal?




-NWA742
Some people are like slinkies - not good for anything, but they bring a smile to your face when pushed down the stairs
 
AerMickey
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 12:55 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A

Tue Jun 15, 2004 9:05 am

I think it is Great Lakes.

Just a hunch.


Mick
 
dynkrisolo
Posts: 1849
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 10:47 am


Not difficult at all but given the A380 should be about 15% more fuel efficient per seat than a 744, then add that to your 10% figure (772 vrs 744) that makes 25%. So the airlines will clearly be put under a higher amount of pressure. Thats all ive been trying to say.


Remember, the 777 has lower unit cost than the 767, and still the 767 is used more often on the trans-Atlantic routes than the much lower cost 747. I guess you just don't want to admit facts that don't agree with what you believe.
 
sabenapilot
Posts: 3668
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2000 6:18 pm

RE: Shocker - Airbus In Talks With US Airlines 4 A380

Tue Jun 15, 2004 6:27 pm

Well I am back from my layover and I must say I am pleased to see so many of you taking up my defense against one frustrated guy with way too much free time to discuss things he knows nothing -or even less- about, yet wants to convince everybody of...

Having been offered a good insight view on the backbone of both A.'s and B.'s narrow body family by having flown (as immature pilot  Big grin) both the A32F and the competing product from Seattle, which was deemed equal -if not better- to the first by a totally unbiased 'expert' like NWA742, I had my own professional opinion on those 'brandnew' modernized NG versions by B., but after reading the very convincing and respectful posts from NWA742, I now stand corrected, off course...  Nuts

After all, I forgot some people love nostalgia and prefer to travel on an updated jetliner rather than on Starship Galactica. Big grin

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos