Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Talking about business ethics ........ good article in Newsweek ....

 

 

Airbus Subsidies Don’t Fly

 

Boeing is justified in its complaints about the government help its European rival receives. Pro or con?

 

Pro: Excessive Lift

by Howard Wheeldon, BGC Partners

 

Forty years after the British, French, and German governments signed the historic Memorandum of Understanding creating Airbus Industrie, Europe’s primary commercial aircraft manufacturer should be standing on its own two feet.

 

We base that opinion on the level of global market share the European manufacturer has achieved—and on the fact that, by receiving European government subsidies, both the European Commission and Airbus contravene certain provisions of Article 3 of the Agreement on Subsidies & Countervailing Measures and those of Article 2 of the General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade (GATT). With the Interim World Trade Organization aircraft subsidies report on the specific U.S. case against the EC due on Oct. 24, the WTO should, in our view, set the scene for ending state aid to Airbus.

 

The U.S. complaint against the EC primarily centers on R&D money provided to Airbus that has no real counterpart in the U.S. This so far has amounted to a claimed $15 billion of what the U.S. rightly says is market-distorting launch aid made available to Airbus by four EU member governments (including Spain).

 

Although technically repayable through the aircraft type’s production lifetime, the reality is that no- or low-interest state loans are essentially risk free to Airbus. In a truly competitive and commercial world, one in which Boeing (BA) and Airbus should be playing on a level field, this is a ridiculous state of affairs. Now that Airbus has captured more than 50% of global market share for commercial aircraft, there are surely few in this industry who could disagree that Airbus has come of age. On that basis alone, Airbus should no longer need to rely on any form of state development-funding arrangements.

 

While the separate EC case against the U.S. alleges that Boeing has received $19.1 billion in “indirect” support—from combined Defense Dept. and NASA military research, development, testing, and evaluation purchase—the benefit to Boeing’s commercial aircraft operation is grossly exaggerated and completely misunderstood by the EC. In my view, the case has absolutely no merit, is a poor response to the U.S. challenge to the EC, and is aimed at causing mutually assured embarrassment.

 

 

Con: Unnecessary Turbulence

by David Pritchard, SUNY at Buffalo

 

Boeing cannot criticize the government subsidies that Airbus receives for two fundamental reasons. First, all major commercial aircraft companies receive government subsidies. Second, Boeing received direct government subsidies on the 787 aircraft from the state of Washington ($3.2 billion equates to $3.2 million per production worker) and $1.6 billion indirect Japanese government subsidies from its Japanese partners.

 

The bigger issue in the World Trade Organization aircraft subsidies dispute is not whether Boeing or Airbus receives illegal government subsidies, since they both do; it’s how countries outside the WTO dispute subsidize their commercial aircraft industries. China and Japan both have national industrial policies to develop their commercial aircraft industry and openly fund the development of commercial aircraft. In fact, Canada and Russia have stated publicly that they are funding their national champions, Bombardier and Sukhoi.

 

But you do not see Boeing and its advocate, the U.S. Trade Representative, filing cases against these countries. The current case was filed so Airbus would not successfully launch a competing aircraft to Boeing’s 787 and 777. Although this tactic caused Airbus to delay the funding mechanisms and entry into service for the A350 XWB by several years, it did Airbus a favor. If Boeing would have let Airbus receive its traditional repayable launch aid for the earlier version of the A350 (based on the A330 airframe), this would have kept intact Airbus’ euro-based production sites. Today, the A350 XWB has better technology advancements in all composite airframe and has production moving to a larger base of risk-sharing partners willing to contract in dollars.

 

So who is the winner in this current WTO dispute? Boeing might have won the WTO battle in stopping repayable launch aid to Airbus, but in the long term Airbus won the war by way of having a better aircraft in the A350 XWB.

[Samsonite 177]

"Today, the A350 XWB has better technology advancements in all composite airframe and has production moving to a larger base of risk-sharing partners willing to contract in dollars."

 

Strictly a personal opinion by the author of the article with no basis in fact.

Looks like something you would write CheshireCat.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Scally,

 

You're sounding increasingly bitter these days.

 

All these delays getting to you? Some folk reckon there will be another slippage in the schedule announced in the next couple of weeks.

 

Considering all those Chinese airlines that are expecting the 787 in time for the Beijing Olympics this doesn't make good reading ........................

 

6-month delay seen for 787 delivery

By JAMES WALLACE

P-I AEROSPACE REPORTER

 

The Boeing Co.'s 787 Dreamliner could be up to six months late, a well-regarded industry analyst warned Friday in a report that sent the company's shares down sharply on Wall Street.

 

Boeing also may be unable to meet its projected 787 production rates, Lehman Brothers analyst Joseph Campbell said in the research note to clients.

Edited October 6, 2007 by CheshireTom

[BigDUSA 71]

Con: Unnecessary Turbulence

by David Pritchard, SUNY at Buffalo

 

So who is the winner in this current WTO dispute? Boeing might have won the WTO battle in stopping repayable launch aid to Airbus, but in the long term Airbus won the war by way of having a better aircraft in the A350 XWB.[/i]

 

It was widely reported that no commercial customers were willing to buy the original A350. I guess you forgot about that.

[wacmedia 277]

Scally,

 

You're sounding increasingly bitter these days.

 

All these delays getting to you? Some folk reckon there will be another slippage in the schedule announced in the next couple of weeks.

 

Considering all those Chinese airlines that are expecting the 787 in time for the Beijing Olympics this doesn't make good reading ........................

 

Hi,

 

The Chinese have long memories and then there is the face issue !!! Time for Airbus to sell lots of planes to our Chinese friends.

Edited October 6, 2007 by wacmedia

[wacmedia 277]

Scally,

 

You're losing the plot, mate.

 

Hi,

 

Taken from a quote by Cheshire Tom on the locked thread. Yes, my American friend seems to be acting strange lately.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

It was widely reported that no commercial customers were willing to buy the original A350. I guess you forgot about that.

 

BigD,

 

You'd be better off just letting everybody think your daft rather than opening your mouth and confirming the fact.

 

Firm orders and options for the original A350 .........

 

 

 

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Hi,

 

Taken from a quote by Cheshire Tom on the locked thread. Yes, my American friend seems to be acting strange lately.

 

Locked thread? LOL.

 

I would assume that with the A380 being delivered in a week or so and Boeings problems with the 787 mounting by the day that these threads will soon just be seen as US bashing and will follow suit.

[BigDUSA 71]

BigD,

 

You'd be better off just letting everybody think your daft rather than opening your mouth and confirming the fact.

 

Firm orders and options for the original A350 .........

 

you can post any chart you want but the facts are the airlines where not going to purchase the original A350. If this wasn't true why would Airbus trash the original and then redesign the airplane with all the cost and delays?

[CheshireTom 1,377]

you can post any chart you want but the facts are the airlines where not going to purchase the original A350. If this wasn't true why would Airbus trash the original and then redesign the airplane with all the cost and delays?

 

It would be helpful if you can post a link to your so-called facts. The original A350 order book is widely available online.

 

Airbus trashed the original at the behest of the likes of Qatar who were not prepared to buy the original but were willing to buy significant numbers of an enhanced version. Which they have.

 

Anyway, is the 787 still going to fly in 2007?

[eltib 54]

Scally,

 

You're sounding increasingly bitter these days.

 

All these delays getting to you?

 

Considering all those Chinese airlines that are expecting the 787 in time for the Beijing Olympics this doesn't make good reading ........................

 

6-month delay seen for 787 delivery

By JAMES WALLACE

P-I AEROSPACE REPORTER

 

The Boeing Co.'s 787 Dreamliner could be up to six months late, a well-regarded industry analyst warned Friday in a report that sent the company's shares down sharply on Wall Street.

 

Boeing also may be unable to meet its projected 787 production rates, Lehman Brothers analyst Joseph Campbell said in the research note to clients.

 

Down $2.25 since yesterday. It was at a all time high of $107-$110.

 

 

Hi,

 

The Chinese have long memories and then there is the face issue !!! Time for Airbus to sell lots of planes to our Chinese friends.

 

Hi,

 

It would be a miracle if Japan did it. They never bought Airbus products before. Once you see long time Boeing

customers in Japan start buying Airbus, you know Boeing will be in trouble.

Edited October 6, 2007 by eltib

[BigDUSA 71]

It would be helpful if you can post a link to your so-called facts. The original A350 order book is widely available online.

 

Airbus trashed the original at the behest of the likes of Qatar who were not prepared to buy the original but were willing to buy significant numbers of an enhanced version. Which they have.

 

Anyway, is the 787 still going to fly in 2007?

 

Wikipedia

 

When Boeing announced their 7E7 Dreamliner project, they claimed the lower operating costs of this airplane would make it a serious threat to Airbus' A330. Publically, Airbus initially rejected this claim, stating that the 787 was itself just a reaction to the A330, and that no response was needed to the 787.

 

The airlines pushed Airbus to provide a competitor, as Boeing had committed the 787 to have 20% lower fuel consumption than today's equivalent types. Initially Airbus proposed a simple derivative of the A330, unofficially dubbed the 'A330-200Lite', with improved aerodynamics and engines similar to those on the 787. The airlines were not satisfied and Airbus committed €4 billion to a new design to be called the A350. The original version of the A350 superficially resembled the A330 due to its common fuselage cross-section and assembly. A new wing, engines and a horizontal stabilizer were to be coupled with new composite materials and production methods applied to the fuselage to make the A350 an almost all-new aircraft.

 

On 16 September 2004, then Airbus president and CEO Noël Forgeard confirmed that a new project was under consideration, but did not give a project name, and would not state whether it would be an entirely new design or a modification of an existing product. Forgeard indicated that Airbus would finalise its concept by the end of 2004, begin consulting with airlines in early 2005, and aim to launch the new development programme at the end of that year.

 

On 10 December 2004 the boards of EADS and BAE Systems, then the shareholders of Airbus, gave Airbus an "authorisation to offer (ATO)", and formally named it the A350.[1]

 

On 6 October 2005 full industrial launch of the program was announced with an estimated development cost of around € 3.5 billion. This version of the A350 was planned to be a 250–300-seat twin-engined widebody aircraft derived from the design of the existing A330. Under this plan, the A350 would have modified wings and new engines while sharing the same fuselage cross-section as its predecessor. Controversially, the fuselage was to consist primarily of Al-Li, rather than the CFRP fuselage on the 787. It was to see entry into service in 2010 in two versions; the A350-800 capable of flying 8,800 nautical miles (16,300 km) with typical passenger capacity of 253 in 3-class configuration and the 300-seat (3-class) A350-900 with 7,500 nautical mile (13,890 km) range. It was designed to be a direct competitor to the 787-9, and 777-200ER.

 

Almost immediately Airbus faced criticism on the A350 project by the heads of two of its largest customers, ILFC and GECAS. On 28 March 2006, in the presence of hundreds of top airline executives, Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, of ILFC lambasted Airbus' strategy in bringing to market what they saw as "a Band-aid reaction to the 787," a sentiment which was echoed by GECAS president Henry Hubschman. Udvar-Hazy called on Airbus to bring a clean-sheet design to the table, or risk losing most of the market to Boeing.[2][3]

 

Several days later, similar comments were made by Chew Choon Seng, CEO of Singapore Airlines. Chew stated, "having gone to the trouble of designing a new wing, tail, cockpit" and adding advanced new materials, Airbus "should have gone the whole hog and designed a new fuselage."[4] At the time, Singapore was reviewing bids for the 787 and A350.

 

Airbus responded by stating it was considering improvements for the A350 to satisfy customer demands.[5] At the same time, Airbus then-CEO Gustav Humbert suggested that there would be no quick fixes, stating, "Our strategy isn't driven by the needs of the next one or two campaigns, but rather by a long-term view of the market and our ability to deliver on our promises."[6]

 

On 14 June 2006, Singapore Airlines announced it had selected the 787 over the A350, ordering 20 787-9s.[7] Emirates decided against making an order for the A350 because of weaknesses in the design.[8]

 

 

[edit] XWB

As a result of these criticisms, in mid-2006 Airbus undertook a major review of the A350 concept. The proposed new A350 was to become more of a competitor to the larger Boeing 777 as well as some models of the Boeing 787, with a larger fuselage cross-section able to accommodate 9 passengers per row in economy class. The A330 and previous iterations of the A350 would only be able to accommodate 8 passengers per row in normal configurations. The 787 can accommodate 8 or 9 passengers per row, while the 777 can accommodate 9 passengers per row (or, rarely, 10). There was some speculation that the revised aircraft would be called the Airbus A370 or A280, with Airbus going as far as accidentally publishing an advert referring to the aircraft as the "A280" on the Financial Times website. However, on 17 July 2006, at the Farnborough Air Show, Airbus announced that the redesigned aircraft would be called A350 XWB (Xtra Wide-Body).

 

Airbus achieved its first sale of the redesigned A350 four days after its unveiling when Singapore Airlines announced an order for 20 A350 XWBs with options of a further 20. Its CEO, Chew Choon Seng, said in a statement, that "it is heartening that Airbus has listened to customer airlines and has come up with a totally new design for the A350." [9]

 

Late in 2006 a decision on formal launch was delayed as a result of delays of the Airbus A380.[10] and wrangles about how the development would be funded. EADS CEO Thomas Enders stated that the A350 program was not a certainty, citing EADS/Airbus' stretched resources.[11][12] On 1 December 2006 the EADS board agreed the industrial launch of the sixth iteration[13] A350 with costs mainly borne out of cash-flow. First delivery for the -900 is scheduled for mid-2013, with the -800 and -1000 following on, respectively, 12 and 24 months later.[14] At a press conference 4 December 2006 a few new technical details of the A350 XWB design were revealed, but no new customers were identified and John Leahy indicated existing A350 contracts were under re-negotiation due to increases in prices compared to the original A350s contracted.

 

 

Billions of Euros down the drain and years of delay. Thank God for the EU taxpayer who has very deep pockets as once again Airbus is looking to

[CheshireTom 1,377]

It may come as a surprise to you but I've read wikipedia. Please highlight where it says no versions of the original 350 were sold.

 

While you're at it you could also highlight where it says Airbus is looking to the EU taxpayer.

 

Just another couple of Walter Mitty moments in the life of BigD methinks.

[BigDUSA 71]

Almost immediately Airbus faced criticism on the A350 project by the heads of two of its largest customers, ILFC and GECAS. On 28 March 2006, in the presence of hundreds of top airline executives, Steven F. Udvar-Hazy, of ILFC lambasted Airbus' strategy in bringing to market what they saw as "a Band-aid reaction to the 787," a sentiment which was echoed by GECAS president Henry Hubschman. Udvar-Hazy called on Airbus to bring a clean-sheet design to the table, or risk losing most of the market to Boeing.[2][3]

 

Several days later, similar comments were made by Chew Choon Seng, CEO of Singapore Airlines. Chew stated, "having gone to the trouble of designing a new wing, tail, cockpit" and adding advanced new materials, Airbus "should have gone the whole hog and designed a new fuselage."[4] At the time, Singapore was reviewing bids for the 787 and A350.

 

Airbus responded by stating it was considering improvements for the A350 to satisfy customer demands.[5] At the same time, Airbus then-CEO Gustav Humbert suggested that there would be no quick fixes, stating, "Our strategy isn't driven by the needs of the next one or two campaigns, but rather by a long-term view of the market and our ability to deliver on our promises."[6]

 

On 14 June 2006, Singapore Airlines announced it had selected the 787 over the A350, ordering 20 787-9s.[7] Emirates decided against making an order for the A350 because of weaknesses in the design.[8]

 

When two of your biggest customers bail and the S'pore air complains then Airbus does a very expensive redesign..............................

[CheshireTom 1,377]

When two of your biggest customers bail and the S'pore air complains then Airbus does a very expensive redesign..............................

 

That maybe so but your claim was that there were no customers for the A350. That wasn't the case, was it? We're well aware of the issues two years ago with ILFC et al. It isn't news to anyone but you.

 

Anyway, back on topic ....... when is the 787 going to fly? Or even be built for that matter?

Edited October 6, 2007 by CheshireTom

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Since MM conveniently closed the Boeing is kicking Euro butt thread I'll have to stick the update here ....

 

Airbus seems to be well on its way to breaking 1,000 aircraft orders for the year ........... Just when you thought someone was kicking your butt ....

 

With 141 orders last month, Airbus slightly narrowed Boeing's lead in the annual sales race.

 

Airbus' gross order total through the end of September, announced Tuesday, stands at 854 jets. Boeing booked 132 orders in September for a gross order total of 903. In the first three-quarters of 2006, a record sales year, Boeing had only 736 gross orders.

 

Since the end of September the following additional firm orders have been announced ........

 

 

October 08, 2007

Air Transport and Cargo

 

US Airways has placed a firm order for 92 Airbus airliners, including the first ever for the A350XWB by a U.S. airline. Re-vealed as an unconfirmed commitment during June’s Paris Air Show [Airbus sales boost confidence], the order for the A350XWBs includes 18 A350-800s and four A350-900s, all scheduled for delivery between 2014 and 2017.

 

Ural Airlines confirmed an MOU signed at the Paris Air Show for seven A320s, Airbus announced. Ural is a new Airbus customer. Aircraft will accommodate 160 passengers in a two-class configuration.

 

PARIS, Oct 9 (Reuters) - Tiger Airways, a fast growing low-fare carrier, has signed a contract for an additional 30 Airbus A320s and 20 options, the EADS (EAD.PA: Quote, Profile, Research) planemaking subsidiary said on Tuesday.

 

It added a memorandum of understanding was first signed at the Paris Airshow in June 2007. The 30 A320 planes have a catalogue value of $2.2 billion.

 

 

WARSAW, Poland: Budget airline Wizz Air signed an agreement Wednesday to buy 50 Airbus A320 aircraft and took options to purchase 25 more.

 

The order without the options was worth US$3.5 billion (€2.5 billion) at list prices, though airlines generally negotiate discounts. Wizz Air did not say how much it was paying.

 

Wizz Air described the deal as its largest, and the Hungarian company said it would own a total of 107 Airbus A320s including the options for the additional 25 planes.

 

With the A380 being delivered next week, delivery of the others being brought forward, a bulging order book, Power8 restructuring well under way it seems that Airbus and EADS has weathered the storm of the last 18 months or so pretty well.

 

Of course, Scally et al will be crying foul, cheats, can't count etc etc etc ...

Edited October 10, 2007 by CheshireTom

[TheFiend 1,179]

Of course, Scally et al will be crying foul, cheats, can't count etc etc etc ...

 

Of course they will, they always do!

 

But, have you ever noticed that when they get a rebuff backed up with facts... they go quiet for a while?

[eltib 54]

Locked thread? LOL.

 

I would assume that with the A380 being delivered in a week or so and Boeings problems with the 787 mounting by the day that these threads will soon just be seen as US bashing and will follow suit.

 

Show your class man. Don't return a slap in the face for another. Just look at Lockheed Martin vs. Boeing PSAs. Instead of saying what they are doing to make flight better (which is bullshit Boeing is trying to make as much money as possible) Lockheed's Public Service Announcement extols their employees virtues on how they are contributing to their communities to make them a better place to live.

 

Who would you rather do business with?

 

A guy that says "I work for Boeing I'm trying to make flight better"

 

Or a person that contributes to the well being of their community,

 

I've always said Lockheed people are sharper than Mc Boing ( including myself). No wonder they are the #1 defense contractor. Maybe that PSA is a hint they'll be re-entering the commercial market.

 

On 14 June 2006, Singapore Airlines announced it had selected the 787 over the A350, ordering 20 787-9s.[7] Emirates decided against making an order for the A350 because of weaknesses in the design.[8]

 

When two of your biggest customers bail and the S'pore air complains then Airbus does a very expensive redesign..............................

 

That was over a year ago. They still have the option of canceling if their order isn't delivered on time as promised.

 

I think Singapore and Emirates are 2 airlines that care to spread the wealth among both manufacturers.

 

 

Of course, Scally et al will be crying foul, cheats, can't count etc etc etc ...

 

 

Seems like Mango tired of fighting us.

Edited October 10, 2007 by eltib

[sabang 0]

Boeing has now admitted the 787 will be six months late.

 

Not uncommon of course, but given that it was an aerospace analyst that first said it a few days before Boeing confirmed it, I think they have done themselves no favours.

Linky-

 

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/new...icle3047661.ece

[wacmedia 277]

But, have you ever noticed that when they get a rebuff backed up with facts... they go quiet for a while?

 

Boeing has now admitted the 787 will be six months late.

 

Hi,

 

The first of many announcements I'd say. Well done to the boardies who called this right, especially eltib and Cheshire Tom .

 

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Waccy,

 

Airbus/EADS has had a tough couple of years and I would like to think that we have enough class not too gloat too much now that many of those same issues are arriving on Boeing's doorstep. Let's keep to the positives ..........

 

For starters .......... those orders just keep rolling in .......

 

Marsans places 61-aircraft order with Airbus, including four A380s

Friday October 12, 2007

Aerolineas Argentinas and Air Comet parent Grupo Marsans, the Spanish tourism and transport giant, yesterday signed an MOU with Airbus for four A380s, 10 A350-900s, five A330-200s, five A321s, 25 A320s and 12 A319s.

 

No catalog value or engine choice was announced in conjunction with the order, which follows Marsans' 2006 commitment for 12 A330-200s.

 

"This purchase is an important step for us at Grupo Marsans in our development. It demonstrates our commitment to enhancing our group's position on the short- and long-haul networks by incorporating the most efficient aircraft on the market today," President Gonzalo Pascual said, noting that "with the A380, we will become the first A380 customer and operator in Spain and South America."

 

I think that order well and truly ensures that Airbus will have a record breaking year as far as orders go, bearing in mind that the Dubai Airshow still has to come next month.

 

As for deliveries, despite the best efforts of Scally etc to convince us otherwise .....

 

Airbus will not be able to compete for the next 6-7 years and Boeing isn't about to let this opportunity slip by.

 

Airbus has maintained its position as the number one producer of commercial aircraft which, given the delay to the 787, it will undoubtedly do so again next year.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

I hope Scally, Fruitcase and BigD are setting their clocks ................

 

http://www.a380delivery.com/

[TheFiend 1,179]

D-3 days and counting

[eltib 54]

I hope Scally, Fruitcase and BigD are setting their clocks ................

 

http://www.a380delivery.com/

 

When does Singapore Air intend on starting their first revenue flights?

[CheshireTom 1,377]

When does Singapore Air intend on starting their first revenue flights?

 

A couple of weeks time ....... the 25th I think.