Wingman wrote:
-------------------------------
Yes Mac, the $142MM figure was given in the press, and not outrageously low as you stated, but a typical 30% discount for a launch order.

The SIA chairman is quoted as saying that the Airbus offer much was more attractive from a financial standpoint. It is only reasonable to assume then that while Boeing tried to "give" the 747NG away, Airbus acutally did "give" it away.

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

See...here's the major rub I have with you Wingman. You many times in the past and othewrs have accused Airbus of "giving airplanes away" and now when Boeing has been in many tense, caught, you blow a gasket seeing this fact being discovered. You cant handle it!

This conundrum that paints one side as Victim and other as Victimizer is ludicrous! Many times I have seen you scream bloody murder about "Airbus giving planes away" and then your side gets exposed for the very same thing. With depreciation, discounts and everything considered, especially the offer to take them off SIA's hands in ten years is tantamount to Boeing literally giving them away! You cant see that!

----------------------------
Many people on this forum praise you for your "well researched" posts, but some of us are intelligent enough to see right through it. You have never, in your entire life on Airliners.net, presented a balanced or unbiased opinion.
---------------------------

I have never pretended to hide my bias. You on the other hand have attempted to cover your tracks as some sort of fair handed debater when we all know the Wingman of not too recent old to be the ardent Airbus Basher, Airbus the Suckling Nymph Welfare Case of Socialist Europe, attempting to destroy Mom, Pop, Apple Pie and anything American.

I have stated my admirations and my likes/dislikes in my personal profile. Can you find it?

You however have attempted to define some sort of crusade in which you want to expose something atune to a Geraldo Rivera episode and you cant.

----------------------------
Boeing makes crap product, the US government is a pure scam, Airbus is absolutely wonderful, and the EU are innocent little lambs struggling in the face of industrial US imperialism.
----------------------------
Boeing making "crap products" If you mean defective 737 rudders, indeed that's a crap product that has killed people. That doesnt mean the rest of Boeing's product line is crap! The 727 was one of the best airplanes ever designed, as have been the 747. Now it's time for a step up from that and that makes me deducing Boeing's product line as "crap". That's YOUR deduction, not mine!

You cant seem to get the point do you? Why the US side is as virginal as the wind driven snow, victimized, Bambi-like, cute and cuddly, Targeted again by this Viscious Socialist/Neo-Communist, sneaky, scheming "ingrateful Europe" Villain dressed in dark clothes.

People are sick and tired of this Wingman and it's about bloody time this cockamamey **broken record** played way too many times -be stopped-!

That old dog dont want to hunt anymore.

The facts speak for themselves on both side of the Atlantic, trade practices, subsidies, tariff schemes, offshore corproation schemes, governments playing the "Third Way" role etc.. All have existed on both sides, but the sad fact is, I am disgusted with one side attempting to don itself in white hats with the other being black.

The polarization your side represents is finally being challenged and I intend to keep on challenging it.

------------------------
Why don't you save us all the aggravation of wading through your never-ending posts and just state your name. We can fill in the rest. Is it really that shameful being an American?

--------------------------------
There's nothing shameful being an American, nor or anything shameful being a Malaysian, Frenchman, German, Pole, Iraqi or Kuwaiti for that matter.

This biggest problem with this seemingly paternalistic/patriotic "Freedom Fighter, Defender of American Industry and everything American" role you have interjected is a useless exercise/patriotism test that is quite indicative of where you want your worst fears to be confirmed. So you can turn in reactionary manner and point out the "Big Enemy" you so desparately need to justify your opinions with. Cold War mentality all over again. We need a Big Enemy...right?

Nope, I'm not the Anti-American you so hope for. Nope, I am a flag waving, American who openly thinks with the brain God gave him and thinks the way he should. Challenging the status quo and using the beautiful concept called "Critical thinking" to arrive at educated judgements. Not reactionary, trigger-fingered, temper tantrums taking on a life of their own.

-------------------------
Get over it man, what happens at Boeing and the halls of Congress happens in every other company and country.
-------------------------

You seemingly deflate -everything- in your attempt at the "patriotic argument" you attempt to impugn me with. Now you finally admit that the US side is just as culpable as Europe! Good Grief...It's working! I cant freaking believe this! That's the whole intent Wingman!

To question -your- side before fingerpointing at the other!

There is hope!
Oh my God..there is hope!

MAC

Teahan wrote:
-------------------------------
Its these kind of topics that make airliners.net special!
My belief is that the A3XX will be launched and sell reasonably well. Now Boeing must be working there heads off to come up with something better (plan B) sice the Boeing 747X will fail to get any orders. Around 2007-2008+ we will see a brand new Boeing NLA. I am willing to bet on that! I believe the Boeing NLA will be a truly great aircrfat like the A3XX.

BoeingB747-400, you are so immature! At least do some research before you post! I have X person in my faimly working in Boeing and my neighbour said this etc. That does not work on airliners.net. You are not a 7 year old in primary school.



Jeremiah

One would hope Boeing DOES make a REAL competitor to the A3XX. I would like to see it. They DO have a design that was leaked last year on Aviation Week, using the engines from the 777 on a true doubledecker airliner frame boasting an A3XX type fuselage. It would be fantastic to see, but the problem lies on Boeing's board of directors. They have taken the route they have, for now, sticking with the 777 and the 747X.

MAC

How was that immature? Is everything immature to you SammyK? So I'm supposed to be all happy when someone calls me names.    

I think your post doesn't make much sense.

MAC, you're swinging at pitches that aren't coming. You have truly sunk to a new level. You want me to go back to the cave or rock, and say I'm mudslinging. I stand by my opinions. I'm not averse to dealing with facts, but the main fact I know is you tire me out. Your posts are an unbroken record of sanctimonius righteous perfection in views of the world and, more specifically, the airline manufacturing industry. You are simply mean spirited at times and I still say it doesn't serve you well. My opinion of your comments being acidic is not mudslinging. However, you have shown you are certainly capable of it. Problem for you is, your comments are in writing.

Hello there Navion,

I have to agree with you on just about everything you have said on this topic. Just wanted to let you know that I support and agree with your posts.

Best Regards,

B744

One huge advantage for Airbus over Boeing right now is the value of the Euro. Does Airbus price in Euro's, or do they use the dollar? The Euro has dropped rather dramatically in the last year, and if Airbus uses it as it's basis, that is a disadvantage to Boeing considering the strong dollar. This can account for a 15%-20% shift in value to purchasers which is huge, especially considering how close these pricing contests get.

Navion

You simply want to avoid discussion of facts, and mock them when they are presented to you, mock them for their length, ignore their source, mock them for whatever floats your boat. That defines YOUR level of ignorance and the "pick and choose" manner you "debate" with. Rather than challenging past posts when they are posted, you decide, "Attack him now, now's the time, Wingman tried it, now it's my turn"! Both of you are of similar opinions. Funny how you showed up now, instead of way back when in the posts regarding CATO, subsidy and so forth. The facts you have such a tremendous problem with are there but you really want to ignore them. CATO speaks for itself, I post them here and yes I interject my views in them because I HAVE experience to back up my views, and no I dont need to post a resume here, that's in my profile.

I can see that and I think *many* here can as well. If posts are acidic, so be it, if one wants to proverbially insert their boot up their ass in public, let them reap the whirlwind for it. If you espouse bullsh*t, expect a cleansing.

--I'm overall tired of stupidity and ignorance--!
--I'm tired of people who dont know how to accept factual sources, or avoid them, mock them for their content, length, et al.--

I'm tired of people who dont know how to tell fact from fiction, fairytale from "accepting the forest for the trees". Far too many fairytales out there espoused as fact when they are not, better defined as "aviation urban myths" using assumption rather than critical thought to arrive at sensible, accurate views and conclusions.

->I'm also not in this as some sort of "Online Sensitivity Awareness Seminar"<-

I'm here to inform and hopefully educate people and get them to start thinking with a critical mind, not a Novacaine-numbed tub of grey mush spewing mindless horsesh*t! Sarcasm (and sometimes biting, but I believe -deserved-) finds it's way into it. Sure. 'Softmindeness' pervades too much and allows too much to happen. Think on that. If you stand there and make a statement, be prepared to back it up!

What I cannot stand though is the adolescent mentality some here espouse and then expect it to be considered serious discussion. Then patted on the back by some of the "adults" here.

That's called a waste of bandwidth.

That's probably the most 'brainy' thing I can agree with you upon in recent posts Navion. Of course this factors in purchases. It would be to Airbus's advantage to exploit this.

Can we expect the US Treasury Department to step in and start buying Euros to prop it up to avoid the 'calamity' this could wreak upon Boeing (G).

MAC, you also have problems. Your constant rambling doesent make any sense. Every one of your post has nothing to do with the SIA order.

Is that right? Can you tell me which one? I'm dying to know! Could you please --Quote in text--, from the very beginning now. Humour Me please!

And by the way, can you also inform me who else isnt discussing the SIA purchase here according to you? Quoted in text...et al.

I'd be behooved and everyone else here would be behooved!?

BTW, I'm stunned to see you completely dismiss the facts portrayed by PhilB, quoting one of the most respected aviation authors, R.E.G. Davies. The dismissal of quotes from Davies work showing that Boeing subsidy existed for the 707-KC-135 line is incredible!

(I'll enter Mean, Viscious, Sarcastic mode now: Our education system really creates wonders these days doesnt it?)

Why who is he?

Mr R.E.G Davies happens to be a curator at the Smithsonian Institution Air And Space Museum in Washington. His work is considered a bedrock of airline/aerospace history compilation. Just thought I'd inform you of that.

MAC

yup, your crazy

I mis-spoke, referring to you rather than MD-90, My mistake and sorry for that, but it's worth -RE-posting over there for completeness-. But that said, thanks for the "Yup your crazy" note, shows how educated you aren't.

Folks,

While I do agree that the success of the "jumbo twins" like the 777 and A330 will mean a combination of phaseout of early 747's and the increasing use of point to point service on trans-oceanic flights, there are still many routes where a larger plane is still necessary.

Take for example the "Kangaroo Route," LHR to SYD/MEL. Have you noticed that BA, VS, and CX have to fly multiple flights per day to keep up with demand? Just on this route there is demand for a larger plane like the A3XX-100. Secondly, look at the flights to HKG and NRT from just about anywhere in the world; they're always full, too.

I think the primary reason why SQ ordered the A3XX-100 is the fact they know a number of their routes--primarily SIN-LHR and their most important route SIN-HKG-SFO--are heavily in demand. SQ now has the plane that will keep up with the increasing growth of air travel in the 21st Century. This is why I said that based on SQ's delivery schedule for the A3XX-100 (most likely early spring 2006) that one of the first airports to served by this new plane will be SFO, replacing the 747-400 now used on the SQ 2 (SIN-HKG-SFO) and SQ 1 (SFO-HKG-SIN) flights.

Contrary to what some believe, I think CX will likely place their A3XX order before the end of this year. After all, their flights are just about always completely full (and we're talking CX using both A330-300 and 777-300 in addition to the A340-300 and 747-400!) and like SQ, they can use the capacity increase offered by the A3XX-100. I won't be surprised one of the first routes the CX A3XX fleet will be flying is HKG-YYZ, especially given the very large ex-patriate Hong Kong community in the Toronto, ON area.

RayChuang,

Glad to see some civility on this post. Thankyou.

Cathay didn't even bother flying HKG-SFO until 1998, which suggests it is not such a great route. And they use A340 vs UA and SQ 744, and dont do so bad.

Ditto the YTO route. CX operate A340 at present, they could use B744 if needed now, so unlikely that A3XX will be medded on the route for next 10 years or so. (assuming that pax and airline preference is to go fordouble daily before larger aircarft)

Is AN/NZ/VS also buying A3XX because of SIA hold their share?

i've heard quite a few times that SIN-HKG-SFO is SQ's most important flight... is this true? i mean, SQ flies to LAX twice daily with 744s compared with 1 744 and 1 A340 each day on the SFO runs, and thrice daily to LHR using 744s, just to name a few flights which operate more frequently and/or with larger aircraft than those to SFO.

It's fairly obvious that none of you ever actually entertain the possibility that the folks in SIA, etc might know a little more about their job than the man on the street. SIA went for the A3XX. Like it or not, 146 million is a giveaway price for the 747X, and still it failed. As for the Airbus deal , the figure was given at a cumulative value of 8.6 billion, allowing 330+ million per aircraft, allowing for inflation. How in god's name is this a giveaway? A much more attractive package is not a giveaway, it just makes more financial sense for SIA than the Boeing proposal, there is a fairly huge difference. Face it, Boeing's stop gap measure has not yet gotten one commitment, while the A3XX forges ahead. It seems to be a cyclical process in the Airline industry. One of the perceived leaders foresees a demand, the other chooses to deny it. One goes ahead with a new plane, and the other is left playing catchup, with a stretch.

Actually, SFO-HKG and LAX-HKG are very popular routes, mostly because of the large ethnic Chinese populations in California. That's why I'm surprised that CX has not flown more flights to SFO and LAX.

It'll be interesting to see if JL or KE orders the A3XX. If the financing deal is a good one, I think both JL and KE will buy the A3XX, especially for flights to Europe and the USA.

For the SIN-HKG-SFO beoing SQ's most important flight... Well, I'm not too sure - it certainly is one of the MOST Important, but most important??... Anyway, another "interesting" thing - the flight (and return) is using flight nos SQ1 and SQ2 - so if flight numbers are anything to go by, perhaps that why they're important huh?? Heee.....

As for their A310s replacements, well, maybe Boeing will get it huh? If you look at the last few "major" orders of SQ, they have always chose suppliers in alternate orders - starting in 1997 with their initial 77 B777s, then in 1998 they opted for A340-500 over B777LRs, then 1999/earlier 2000 went for B777s again (and even got Boeing to buy of their existing A340-300Es to finance their B777-200ERs options), and now A3xx... So, if the "trand" is go go by, will we be seeing Boeing as a replacement for their A310s???? Anyway it'll be sad tho when their A310s retire - I love the A310s!...

Regards

The assumption that the 744 is not a money maker for the airlines is still doubtful.

Case in point: Singapore, Qantas, Cathay, etc etc.
The logistics and cost benefits of flying 4 744s SIN-LHR per day far outweigh those of flying 6 777s.

I should let this silly exchange end here, but a couple of more points. MAC, you'll have seen by now the new thread containing a Reuters story which quotes widely from the corps of aerospace analysts. They seem to be in agreement that the SIA order is a straight money loser. When I said "give" in my earlier posts, you should have notice the quotation marks. Boeing and Airbus don't give anything away. They may agree to a money losing deal when the stakes are high (and the stakes have never been so high for Airbus), but only if they're confident that the deal will result in profitability down the road. The SIA order doesn't anger me, it interests me as someone interested in this business. You, on the other hand, have no interest in the industry per se, but only manage to use this forum as a means of communicating your perfectly biased views toward Boeing, American culture(???), the US government and also your blind faith in Airbus. A well educated person seeks always to study and analyze both sides of a debate (or competition) and come to a conclusion or opinion based on reasoning. You choose only to "hear" those things so you desperately need to believe. Again, you've never posted a single criticism of Airbus in your entire life and your criticims of Boeing always seems to wander to American culture and the US government. I lived overseas for 25 years and met many people like you, Americans petrified of being labeled as a typical John Wayne ignorant American. They would always criticize everything about the US as a way of "fitting in" better. I was never ashamed of being American. Just the opposite, I was (and am) as proud as any Frenchman, Taiwanese, or Nigerian is of being from his or her country. Take a deep breath MAC, the country you served ain't all that bad.

Wingman,

The A3XX order a "money loser"?? Remember, SQ was among the first airlines to order the 747-200B, 747-300 and 747-400 models. Because of the popularity of SQ flights, that's why they've gone for the biggest jets available.

As for the A310 replacement, I think SQ may be looking at buying 767-300ER as a straight replacement, given that Airbus is still some ways from launching the A330-500. SQ could get 767-300ER's new from the Boeing production line in about 15 months or so, as opposed to 20-24 months for getting the A330-500 (since Airbus will have to first build, test and get FAA/JAA certification for the plane).

Wingman wrote:
-------------------------------
I should let this silly exchange end here, but a couple of more points. MAC, you'll have seen by now the new thread containing a Reuters story which quotes widely from the corps of aerospace analysts. They seem to be in agreement that the SIA order is a straight money loser.
-------------------------------


Indeed, I just saw that and had a chuckle or two for reasons stated below:
They say the first ten airplanes are money losers and yet there are 32 total on the books. Does that mean the other 22 are "money makers" then? Or in the spirit of further defame of Airbus Industrie, those are money losers as well? I also notice not a word spoken on just how low Boeing was willing to give their 747X away and did it in essence to screw Airbus, which I guess is fine if you want to look at it that way. Maybe Boeing knew SIA wasnt going to sign on the 747X and used them to get a loweball price from Airbus. No financials however have been released on this deal, only word has it that SIA reports it worth over $8 billion. I wager that the price is probably closer to $6.5-7 billion (no factual backing on that but I figure between a 15 and 25% discount overall which is about average)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I said "give" in my earlier posts, you should have notice the quotation marks. Boeing and Airbus don't give anything away. They may agree to a money losing deal when the stakes are high (and the stakes have never been so high for Airbus), but only if they're confident that the deal will result in profitability down the road.
-----------------------------


Of course I agree with that as well. Airbus is launching an airplane and wants to get it selling. I also dont forget the hooting and hollering last year over the SIA 777/A340 purchase-swap-out that caused so much of an uproar here and how some thought it was "then end of the A340" and "Freebus" and so forth. I think Airbus remembers this and it could have had a part to play in all of this, maybe a bit of sweet revenge. Although overall I see them ordering -more- A340-500s after service introduction and a shake down on routes. I'm quite excited over the RR Trent engine offered on the A340NG and once the airplane enters service, I see a stiffening of competition between the 777X and A340NG.

That's pure speculation, but I sense it and it's a very strong hunch.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The SIA order doesn't anger me, it interests me as someone interested in this business. You, on the other hand, have no interest in the industry per se, but only manage to use this forum as a means of communicating your perfectly biased views toward Boeing, American culture(???), the US government and also your blind faith in Airbus.
---------------------------

Here the record you were playing literally skips off the vynyl and scratches the hell out of itself. I am very much interested in the industry and have been a part of it for the better part of 8 years during the 80s and 90s, I soon may be returning back into it and you are wrong that I have no interest in it. I have been quite active in the hobby interest as well, take a trip over to FlightSim.Com and go do a file library search on my real name (seen in my profile) and see what it comes up with..(BG)

Just go take a look. Want to see what I have helped -give- to people and enjoyed doing it? I enjoyed it and since then I have moved on to commercial pursuits amongst other things.

As for a critique of American Culture, take a good look around you! The decline of this culture is real and not fiction. Authors like Morris Berman have chroniciled it in a very telling book called "The Twilight of American Culture". If you want to understand just a part of my views, read this book. I cant put it down.

Plainly said, we've become the McSociety, dominated by corporate oligarchs, ruled by corrupt politicians who cow-tow to those corporate oligarchs, with a population that is acceleratingly becoming, dumb. I'm convinced that we literally have a generation of dummies around us and that's not meant to be sarcastic, it's meant to identify something real. The true lack of intelligence in people. We are gifted with incredible technology, but we cant even locate our state capitals on a map. 40 percent of adults cant even locate Japan on a map. Couple this with a corporate world that has seen to the destruction of over 43 million -real paying jobs- since 1979, yet our politicians tell us "these are the best times ever" yet the real numbers are showing the disparity between rich and poor in this country is at it's highest -ever-. how can that be? Again, read the book.

Have you ever been downsized Wingman? Have you ever had your career marginalized or "become a number without a face attached to it". Ask some who have. It's more prevalent than we think or like to admit. Yet we continue to elect jerks who dont do anything about it, because we dont know how to challenge anymore. We've lost our will to challenge. We are becoming the new "Silent Generation".

Real Leadership, is no-where. To contrast and illustrate: During the 1960s, President John F. Kennedy challenged US Steel to come down on it's prices for he felt they were gouging the consumers with ridiculous price increases. They did after intense lobbying by JFK. Today, a President is more likely to have the corporate bosses over for dinner and getting campaign contributions, rather than challenging them on why they pay Indonesian workers a $1.03 per day making shoes for Nike. (Just do it!)

The quality of character has changed. The American people, have changed.
I sincerely believe they dont care anymore.

They want their Palm Pilots, their Cellphones, their DVD's and their SUV's.
(BTW-which I believe is a MAJOR part of the price increase in gas lately, yet who gets all the blame? Ever try to fill one of those expensive tubs? how many times a week?..do the math, what seems to be jamming America's highways more and more these days?..no wonder gas is high, yet people cant seemingly put that part of the equation together, but they'd rather force Saudi Arabia to drain it's only resource it has (oil reserves) so we can look masculine and powerful in our mechanized tyrannosaurus rex that commands a $60000 price tag and drinks gasoline like an M-1 Abrams battle tank. Afterall, impression matters before brains. Doesnt it? If you've got it, flaunt it?

One of the biggest irritants to me is that the level of intelligence means nothing anymore. Case in point, a CBS News interview with Dan Rather interviewing a prominent schools superintendent from the Washington DC area saying "Frederick Douglass, who lived several hundred years ago, said "Those who dont learn from history are doomed to relive it". Rather didnt challenge him on it either.

Firstly, Frederick Douglass didnt live "several hundred years ago and secondly he never said that, George Santayana did, a man who lived in the 20th century.
If this guy is the schools superintendent, what are his teachers like, what are their students like? What it speaks of is the overall dumbness of people in recent years and it seems to be accelerating. Dangerously.

In my vast travels overseas, everytime I come back to the USA, I experience culture shock, moreso than that experienced in the lands I've lived, it's a more techno-societo-culture shock. Again, in the past decade, and incredibly so.
I want to challenge people to start thinking because my sincere belief is, this vast country with such vast potential is becoming an almost punishing experience to take with a full stomach.

There is NOTHING unpatriotic in that view, it's a commonsense, realist view.

--------------------------------------------------
A well educated person seeks always to study and analyze both sides of a debate (or competition) and come to a conclusion or opinion based on reasoning. You choose only to "hear" those things so you desperately need to believe. Again, you've never posted a single criticism of Airbus in your entire life and your criticims of Boeing always seems to wander to American culture and the US government. I lived overseas for 25 years and met many people like you, Americans petrified of being labeled as a typical John Wayne ignorant American. They would always criticize everything about the US as a way of "fitting in" better.
-------------------

I criticize Boeing because they seem to get too much of a free ride. No one challenges them. At least prior to my arrival here. I watched this place for months and months before finally having enough of the one-sided drivel and chipped in because I want people to start challenging again. Again, there's nothing unpatriotic in that.

As for "trying to fit in", of course you try to fit in Wingman! You can have your Walmart back home, what's so bad about foreign cultures and living amongst them?

I learned a very basic and excellent line of words to follow while living overseas: "When in Rome, do as the Romans do".

Blending in rather than standing out also will -save your life- in some countries I might add. I was an unofficial "ambassador of good will" always, I also took an interest in learning the local culture. It was a mind broadening experience. I dont have to export my culture to them to show how American I am. That's not being a really open-minded 'ambassador' either. It doesnt mean I surrender my values for theirs, it means I learn about theirs and learn to appreciate and sometimes learn to walk away from with good taste in mind also.)

I remember some in the military, Marines particularly, who'd love to boast "Join the Marines, See the World, Visit Strange Lands, Meet unique cultures and people, Then kill them!" Some huge yuk-yuks over that too. True Ugly Americanism at it's darkest of 'wit'. I didnt find it funny at all, quite sad actually.
And for one who particpated in a war that evacuated American familes (2400 within 3 days) along with a bombing campaign and war that murdered over 150,000 Iraqis over what is now cynically accepted: access to cheap oil, (indeed we dont need to get into a lengthy discourse about that butcher-bastard Saddam, but lets look at who -really- paid for it, his -people did-..that doesnt answer the common misnomer of "It's Saddam's fault!"...Who cries for those killed?) Who?

And then later on the sanctions of which starved over 500000 Iraqi children since the end of that War.

If you have a conscience, wouldnt that gruesome, bloody reallity and toll make you wonder about life, what you did. And above all. Why?

It's guilt indeed, tempered with critical thought. Add to that medical anomalies that you have been confronted with since the end of that war, met with denial and obfuscation by the same government that brought such things as Agent Orange in a war not historically long before the 'desert one'.

I challenge people to stand up and be counted.

Speak up and get a voice or someone else will do it for you. (more like -to you-)

And No, it's not being unpatriotic.

It's called having a conscience.

----------------------------------------------------------
I was never ashamed of being American.
----------------------------------------------------------

Me neither, I have however been ashamed of our government and how it's done some things. It's corrupt and out of touch with people. The richest country on earth, A country that goes out of it's way to screw it's poor by cutting welfare benefits, timing them to less than 2 years of use, which overall have cost less than $12 billion, while it obliquely looks the other way at the obnoxious $65-$75 up to $110 billion it doles out to the very same companies that send jobs to places like Communist China or zeroes the jobs out completely and watches Wall Street cheer over it!?

A United States that also uses the death penalty in assembly line fashion? With no one thinking about it anymore? Incredible.

The morality in all those issues I just spit out, draw a yawn from some, cheers of "kill them" in another, or cheering applause on Wall Street.

While the working families of this country, -pay for it all-.
Again, that's a realists view. Not unpatriotic. It's the truth.

The same country that fought a war over slavery 135 years ago, now seeks to do business with a tyrant state to take advantage of it's cheap labor to satisfy it's vast consumerist masses back home who could give a rip less the what and the who went into making it for their petty littleminded pleasures.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Just the opposite, I was (and am) as proud as any Frenchman, Taiwanese, or Nigerian is of being from his or her country. Take a deep breath MAC, the country you served ain't all that bad.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

-Never- said it was bad Wingman, I have just identified some points that are glaring to me. It needs to start thinking and be challenged again. It needs to define itself again. We took on a king whose name was George the 3rd and whipped the greatest navy in the world, built a nation, fought a horrible Civil War, industrialized itself, brought workers rights to the forefront, lost it's ass in a Great Depression that humbled the country, fought two major world wars and two brutal "police actions", the latter which people finally began to question the morality of, while at the same time we finally began to understand the concept of civil rights.......And then for about 30 years after that...things stopped happening. In the last ten years especially. The focus of our lives hasnt been for good of country, it's been for the good of our gut! Think on these points and you may agree with some, disagree with others.

If I at least got you or others thinking during this "essay", I have achieved everything that I could possibly ask for. Simple enough no?

MAC

Beautiful post...Beautiful...I agree 200% on all what you've said...

E.

I poured my heart out in that and I appreciate you kind words!

Best Regards
MAC

sorry these aircrafts are not for me......ive have probs with working on a320s,a330s,a340s and know this !!!!...another plastic fantastic junk! 
ill stay with all time favorite boeing airplanes...much reliable in every way in long run  best of luck boeing with b747x project!...

As usual, my hat's off to you, MAC!

Respect. And I mean it.

Regards
the WorldTraveller

Thanks WorldTraveller, I appreciate the kind words. I poured my heart out and let me just say that there is a lot more to add to it but I think I made myself clear. There are so many events that have happened in my life that have caused me to come full circle in less than 34 years on this earth. Events that shake you in your soul, shape you as a human being.

Regards
MAC

I lived in the U.S. for approx. 6 months and I can understand what you're trying to say. I found American society very contradictory.

What I love about the U.S. is their openness and the kindness of most people. On the other hand, most of them tend to be rather superficial.

Europe is looking with great care at the U.S. elections and nearly 80% of us want Gore/Liebeman to win, since Europe want a democratic, responsible, human America as a partner. Can't think of it when Mr. "Dunno" or Mr. "execution" wins.

Anyway, maybe this is not the forum for this kind of stuff.


Regards
the WorldTraveller

Well, I've got one better...(G)

I'm voting for Ralph Nader and Winona LaDuke this year on the Green Party ticket. I'm a proud member of the Green Party.

The Democrats and Republicans represent nothing for the American people. Both represent the monied interests in Corporate America and want to keep it that way. The only difference between the Democrats and Republicans is that the Democrats are 'pro-choice'. That's about it. Remember, Democrat rule of the White house brought the USA NAFTA, WTO, Permanent trade status with China, incredible disparity of wealth (rich vs poor). While an opposition party controlled both Houses of Congress. Both parties represent the same evil that has sold out the American people and yes, people all around the world. They both represent fantastic levels selfishness and arrogance or power not ever seen in US history. They only care about their careers as politicians and later on comfy cushy corporate jobs in industry or as some speculate Clinton will become active in, Hollywood.

It's dangerous if the American people keep electing these people. It's GOT to end.

Ralph Nader is a _TRUE_ American hero to me, he confronted the US auto industry in the early 1960s with his book "Unsafe at Any Speed" detailing the incredible problems the automobile called the "Corvair" had with it. (it literally could topple over at almost -any- speed. His efforts FORCED accountability and safety in automobiles. He's an outspoken opponent of Corporate Welfare and Corporate abuse.

The poor of this country have paid enough for the largess of the rich and powerful.

It's time to take our country -back-.

If we lose the middle class of this country, the USA will collapse. There is no doubt about that. I dont want to see Czarist Russia or Nero's Rome to happen here, but we are well on that path.

It happened with Rome centuries ago and the signs outlined in Morris Berman's book "The Twilight of American Culture" outline three basic premises of how a culture collapses. We are living amongst all of them right now. It's scary stuff, in many ways inevitable, but it needs to be identified and hopefully spelled out so people can become educated to what is happening around them.

Get that book and read it. You wont be able to put it down for a minute!

Regards
MAC

One further note,

Ralph Nader wants to abolish the death penalty. If there is anything that tells something about a people, it's that issue.

"Dub'ya" smirked like a jackal back during the Tucker execution at the Texas 'lethal injection mill' in Huntsville, Texas while ample evidence is mounting several executions have been done to innocent people! Try arguing this -there-?! You'd probably get dragged behind a pickup truck for speaking your mind against it!

This insane, cruel practice is NOT the signature of a 'humane people', it's the signature of a cruel and brutal one.

Life in prison without parole for killers is FAR cheaper to employ than any death penalty (proven when you factor in all the costs and so forth) yet some out there have that glowing red vein of revenge in their eye that killing someone makes something "right".

The term "Civilization" becomes associated more with a computer game rather than something -people- can practice.

MAC

MAC, I appreciate what you believe.

However, since Nader has no chance of winning, one should vote Gore to prevent Bush from becoming President, don't you think?

BTW, did you read "False Dawn: The Delusions of Global Capitalism" by John Gray?

It really provides some interesting thoughts.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1565845927/qid=970582043/sr=1-21/104-4969383-6398323

Hmmm, how long will it take that our posts will be deleted?

Guess we're getting a bit off topic here...

Regards
the WorldTraveller

Yes, a bit off topic and I would appreciate if you did not continue it under this thread. Please take this to the Non-aviation forum.

Thanks,
Johan

This is nuts. You guys..repeat over and over:
IT'S ONLY AN AIRPLANE!...IT'S ONLY AN AIRPLANE!.

Allright, back to business as usual... 

Today's FI reports that Boeing may offer the B747X freighter first, 12-18 months before the B747X passenger variants.

begin quote:

Max Kingsley-Jones/WASHINGTON DC

"Boeing is considering adopting the freighter version of the Boeing 747X Stretch as the first of the new 747 models to enter service. A decision in its favour would give the US manufacturer a lead of up to 18 months over the rival A3XX freighter.

Boeing says that, if customer demand is such, the 150t all-cargo model could lead the programme, enabling it to enter service in late 2005. "If the market wants a freighter first, we'll do it," Boeing regional director marketing James Edgar told Flight International at the Air Cargo Forum 2000 in Washington DC, 28-29 September.

He adds that the second 747X Stretch model to be developed would follow 12-18 months later.

If the freighter is the launch aircraft, service entry of the passenger model would be at least a year later than the A3XX passenger variant, which is due in late 2005. The A3XXF is due two years later."

end quote


Well, clearly the B747X freighter would have an advantage over the A3XXF, especially since some carriers urgently need larger planes (Fedex, Atlas Air).

However, the A3XX-100 passenger version would get a boost too since the B747X stretch would come out 12-18 months later.

Hmmm, maybe Boeing trys to fully grab the (large) freighter market admitting that the B747X passenger variants won't sell?? (thereby leaving the 400+ seat battlefield to Airbus).

Your opinions are welcomed!

Regards
the WorldTraveller

Correct, Worldtraveller. Boeing is indeed considering making just a cargo version of the 747X as that’s where they see the most market potential for VLAs. My uncle is now a structural engineer for Boeing, working on the 777X project. He has also worked as a structural engineer on the 747X project until it (along everyone else working on the project) was canned in ’97, as well as for BAE, Airbus’ British subsidiary. He was fired from them as well. Doesn’t speak too highly of Airbus. Anyways, he also told me that Boeing’s other option is to forego the VLA market entirely and let Airbus monopolize it. Boeing is apparently so convinced that there is no market for VLAs that they’ll let Airbus risk this venture alone.

Thanks for the inside info, Louis.

Well, that's all very interesting...

But don't you agree that it's a HIGH RISK enterprise for Boeing if they have nothing to compete in the VLA market? You know, it's the market where planemakers can make the most profit (see what Boeing did with the B744).

Regards
the WorldTraveller

Boeing makes big profits on the 747 only because the development costs have been paid for by now. If they were to develop a brand new aircraft such as the A3XX, they wouldn't see the huge profits for some time.

Sammy

Sammyk,

are you sure ? what about the profits on the 737 then...they must be huge !!! But I am not so sure...It is competition driven, the B747 has no counterpart, so no price reference as such, therefore the fat margin in my humble opinion...Development costs being history is also a factor you're right, but certainly not a major one.

E.

Well, yes, from that point of view you're right. Prices can be inflated when competition doesn't exist, but I doubt the profit margins were as huge as they are now on the 747-400 than when it first came out.

Remember, when the 737NG came out, they needed 400 aircraft to pay for development, and after that it was to be all profit, but that number was changed to 800 after they shut down the line and had production problems. I suppose with nearly 2000 orders, it doesn't seem like a big deal anymore.

Sammy

Well when you "all profit", you mean of course that the margin on each aircraft is all profit and does not have to recoup any development cost...Then again, it depends on how big the margin is...Especially knowing the efficiency problem or labor costs Boeing had to face in the late 90s.

E.

Yes, that's what I mean by "all profit". I don't think the margin has anything to do with it, I mean they may have been making the same "amount" or percentage of profit, but a portion, or maybe all of that profit was going toward paying for development costs. Now after the costs have been paid for, all of the profit can go right in the bank. What they can do now is lower the margin for the sake of making a better sale without losing any money they wanted to put toward development costs.

Sammy

I think a lot has to do with how the development costs are expensed.

In the seventies, Boeing expensed most their r&d cost as it was incurred on each program. Now, it is on a production unit basis. This might have made the 747 the cash cow that it was....a least on paper. The initial r&d costs were accounted for long before any improvements or upgrades to the line.

Now, a portion of each planes sales price is credited to the r&d cost....hence it will take Boeing 800 units to recoup on the 737NG line.

I'll assume it was tax consequences that lead to the change in accounting.

Interesting note: Because McDD was constantly improving the DC-9/MD80+ line...they never showed a profit on that line at all. Each aircraft was sold at a loss (well...at least on paper).