Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[jacko 8,866]

 

Airbus has the EU taxpayer to pay the bills. It's easy to offer financing at a loss when the EU taxpayer is footing the bill.

You are always harping on about this, but aren't Boeing scrounging around for tax breaks now?

Effectively getting a subsidy from the US taxpayer?

Reuters

Washington state lawmakers pass tax breaks, aiming to win Boeing work.

Edited November 10, 2013 by jacko

[BigDUSA 71]

I'm against government subsidies for Airbus as well as Boeing. Both companies are screwing the taxpayer.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Both companies are screwing the taxpayer.

 

Obviously the voice of experience on such matters. I'm sure the very thought of someone creating work opportunities fills you with dread.

Edited November 10, 2013 by CheshireTom

[BigDUSA 71]

Do it without government handouts.

[wacmedia 277]

Do it without government handouts.

 

Hi,

 

All the big companies depend on Government contracts to make a profit. Capitalism has been replaced by Corporatism/Fascism. You live in an old style Soviet gualag and dont seem to realise it. Eisenhower/JFK warned you buggers about it, but it looks too late now.

[ttk 236]

You are always harping on about this, but aren't Boeing scrounging around for tax breaks now?

Effectively getting a subsidy from the US taxpayer?

Reuters

Washington state lawmakers pass tax breaks, aiming to win Boeing work.

The special session just completed extended the existing breaks until 2040 and will cost 9,000,000,000 in tax revenue over the 27 years of the agreements. This is to TRY and keep the 777x assembly work in the unionized plants in Washington. However, the second part of the big picture requires the Manchinits Union to accept a new contract that they are already rallying against. They are being asked to accept smaller (NOT NO) pay raises, a switch to a 401k plan from the Boeing plan, higher portion of the medical costs and probably a few other examples designed to save Boeing money in order to be competitive with Airbus. All of which boeing has in the new Non-union South Carolina plant.

[jacko 8,866]

This could be an interesting week..... and it is looking like the 777X may not be built in Washington State, since the Union shook it's head.

Yet big orders are expected for the777X this week!

 

AIRSHOW-Dubai Airshow to open with Gulf spending spree.

 

Reuters

Edited November 17, 2013 by jacko

[jacko 8,866]

And now that we got all your orders from Dubai.... we just thought we would tell you....

 

Boeing warns of engine icing risk on 747-8s, Dreamliners.

 

Reuters.

Edited November 23, 2013 by jacko

[BeerBelly 1,026]

A Boeing 737 was forced to make an emergency landing because of engine icing.

 

This was in 1988 of course, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TACA_Flight_110 . And the 737 continues to be one of the most successful planes.

 

Plane and engine design is an iterative process. This is nothing more than that.

[jacko 8,866]

A Boeing 737 was forced to make an emergency landing because of engine icing.

 

This was in 1988 of course, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TACA_Flight_110 . And the 737 continues to be one of the most successful planes.

 

Plane and engine design is an iterative process. This is nothing more than that.

The 737 uses CFM 56 engines, the 747-800 and 787 are using GEnx engines.

The one in 1988 could have been Pratt and Whitney.

[BeerBelly 1,026]

The 737 uses CFM 56 engines, the 747-800 and 787 are using GEnx engines.

The one in 1988 could have been Pratt and Whitney.

 

My point was that back in 1988 they had problems with engine icing. They analysed what was wrong then corrected the problems. The 737s didn't go away. They still exist and are very popular. The 787s will continue to exist unless the 777x completely replaces them and Boeing decides to halt production of 787. Personally I hope not as I would like to fly in a 787 to see how the higher pressure, moister air and larger windows make a difference in comfort.

[Samsonite 181]

Two or three years ago a 777 with Rolls Royce engines landed short of the runway at Heathrow for the same reason. No one was killed, but the aircraft was a write off.

[jacko 8,866]

Two or three years ago a 777 with Rolls Royce engines landed short of the runway at Heathrow for the same reason. No one was killed, but the aircraft was a write off.

I recall that one, coming in from China and had been in very cold outside temps for some time.

Fuel freezing in the lines wasn't it?

 

Same issue?

[Samsonite 181]

Ice clogged the fuel screens, with the same end result, loss of power. Rolls supposedly modified the heat exchangers to solve the problem.

Edited November 25, 2013 by Samsonite

[nkped 1,208]

Air Canada will be purchasing 61 to 109 737 Max aircraft replacing their narrow body Airbus planes. http://www.cnbc.com/id/101266411 As much as I like the wide body Airbus planes, their narrow bodies seem more like flying Chevrolets.