Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[Samsonite 181]

"EVERETT, Wash., June 23 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Boeing (NYSE: BA) today announced that first flight of the 787 Dreamliner will be postponed due to a need to reinforce an area within the side-of-body section of the aircraft.

 

The need was identified during the recent regularly scheduled tests on the full-scale static test airplane. Preliminary analysis indicated that flight test could proceed this month as planned. However, after further testing and consideration of possible modified flight test plans, the decision was made late last week that first flight should instead be postponed until productive flight testing could occur."

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/

*********

 

Total complete Nonsense!!!!!!!!!!!

I bet they have known about this all along, and, in terms of recent events didn't want to say anything until after the Paris Airshow.

 

This a complete disgrace!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The senior executives, and I mean the very TOP OF THE PILE, every last one of them, should return their salaries and then they should ALL BE FIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I tried to hang on as long as possible, but I no longer have any faith in Boeing or anything they say or do... WHAT HAPPENED to the company we once knew????

I still think it is the same idiots who ran McDonnell/Douglas into the ground are responsible for the demise of Boeing....

 

If the problem is this serious, it won't fly. It will have to junked... and how many will have to junked before they have something that is airworthly... This is going to cost them BIG time.... The cancellations will flow like water over a damn and the orders will go to airbust. As I said, the EXECUTIVEs, not the workers, responsible should be FIRED in DISGRACE...

 

My policy when traveling has always been the old, "if ain't Boeing, I ain't going," but no more. A company that screwed up does not deserve any loyalty from the flying public or even from their own employees.

WHAT A DISASTER BOEING HAS BECOME!!!!!!!!!

Edited June 23, 2009 by Scalawag

[TheFiend 1,181]

Scally.... I can't believe you have just wrote that!!!!

 

You are a very strong supporter of Boeing, but I guess you have just had enough!

 

I have been saying for a while that problems would occur during commissioning, design faults would surface. Boeing Senior management seem to think problems like these don't happen, the reality is it does. Boeings credibility in the airline industry will take a knock now, but the last thing we need is for Boeing to go under. The competition between Boeing and Airbus needs to be healthy for ongoing development of better, more efficient aircraft.

[Hub 203]

Stock down almost 9% , just when I was recovering value (bought a bunch more in the 30s)

[joekicker 53]

Stock down almost 9% allright , just when I was recovering value (bought a bunch more in the 30s) ang2

 

You've had Boeing stock for more than 70 years?

Edited June 23, 2009 by joekicker

[eltib 54]

Total complete Nonsense!!!!!!!!!!!

I bet they have known about this all along, and, in terms of recent events didn't want to say anything until after the Paris Airshow.

 

Of course they did.

 

This a complete disgrace!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The senior executives, and I mean the very TOP OF THE PILE, every last one of them, should return their salaries and then they should ALL BE FIRED!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

I agree 100% Plus the idiots that sit on the redeployment selection process boards. Boeing should also take ANYTHING from the Gartner Group as joke. They are the firm that recommends outsourcing key functions within private organizations.

 

I tried to hang on as long as possible, but I no longer have any faith in Boeing or anything they say or do... WHAT HAPPENED to the company we once knew????

I still think it is the same idiots who ran McDonnell/Douglas into the ground are responsible for the demise of Boeing....

 

I've been saying this since 1997 Since McD became part of Boeing. Boeing needs to divest ALL it's McD aquisitions, or fire every single McD manager / executive.

 

If the problem is this serious, it won't fly. It will have to junked... and how many will have to junked before they have something that is airworthly... This is going to cost them BIG time.... The cancellations will flow like water over a damn and the orders will go to airbust. As I said, the EXECUTIVEs, not the workers, responsible should be FIRED in DISGRACE...

 

Ok I guess you'll book your next trip on a slow boat to China.

 

My policy when traveling has always been the old, "if ain't Boeing, I ain't going," but no more. A company that screwed up does not deserve any loyalty from the flying public or even from their own employees.

WHAT A DISASTER BOEING HAS BECOME!!!!!!!!!

 

You won't see this ex-employee of Boeing of over 22 years give them any loyalty. Just my former manager who stuck up for my coworkers and I, when we got the axe. I don't even talk to the other morons who were our coworkers. BTW I heard our lead who had a job created for her got the axe back in March. Probably because she abused her sick leave.

Edited June 23, 2009 by eltib

[Hub 203]

You've had Boeing stock for more than 70 years?

 

http://www.ilovewavs.com/Effects/Music/Sou...-%20Rimshot.wav

[CheshireTom 1,377]

My policy when traveling has always been the old, "if ain't Boeing, I ain't going," but no more.

 

That's just plain silly ...... "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going".

 

I like Airbus products but the best economy class I've seen is on SQ's 777s and the best biz class, that I can afford, is on Qatar's 777s.

[Samsonite 181]

That's just plain silly ...... "If it ain't Boeing, I ain't going".

 

That saying has been around a lot longer than you have.

 

The 777 is a very comfortable aircraft.

Sorry, I don't care for airbust aircraft, but the A340 is a nice looking plane. Looks like the old Boeing 707, just larger.

Actually, airbust makes a good product, but my dislike of airbust goes back to their way of doing business, but that subject was beaten to death a long time ago.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

That saying has been around a lot longer than you have.

 

The 777 is a very comfortable aircraft.

 

I meant that the SQ and QR products were very good, the aircraft is irrelevant.

[Samsonite 181]

I meant that the SQ and QR products were very good, the aircraft is irrelevant.

Not really, but I guess it does depend on a passenger's knowledge of, and interest in, aircraft.

The "average" passenger probably doesn't know or care what type of aircraft they are on as long as they arrive safely at their destination.

There was an interesting post on airliners.net a few days ago. The poster said he mother had taken a recent trip and she just couldn't say enough, positive, about the new A380 she had flown on. The poster, being an aviation geek,

was pretty sure his mother had not flown on an A380 and looked it up. She had been on a Boeing 747 and didn't know the difference.

To me it does make a difference.

[wacmedia 277]

Hi,

 

When will the Nightmareliner fly ? will it ever fly ?

 

Hi,

 

However, composite components on some newer models are not as good at shedding electrical energy and are particularly prone to damage from lightning strikes. By Emile Laurac

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Not really, but I guess it does depend on a passenger's knowledge of, and interest in, aircraft.

.....................

To me it does make a difference.

 

That's because you're paranoid. Nothing to do with the aeroplanes themselves.

[wacmedia 277]

You won't see this ex-employee of Boeing of over 22 years give them any loyalty. Just my former manager who stuck up for my coworkers and I, when we got the axe. I don't even talk to the other morons who were our coworkers. BTW I heard our lead who had a job created for her got the axe back in March. Probably because she abused her sick leave.

 

Hi,

 

Your posts about the management have proved right.

[wacmedia 277]

Hi,

 

Airbus are still moving ahead despite difficult times.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8114464.stm

 

Airbus makes first plane in China

 

.

Airbus has officially delivered its first Chinese-made plane.

 

The aircraft, one of the firm's A320 mid-range models, was unveiled at a ceremony at the firm's factory outside the northern Chinese city of Tianjin.

 

The plane has been delivered to leasing firm Dragon Aviation, and will be used by Chinese carrier Sichuan Airlines.

 

BBC Beijing correspondent Quentin Sommerville said Airbus hopes its Chinese factory will give it a big advantage over US rival Boeing.

 

While Boeing makes components in China, Airbus is the first of the world's big-two aircraft-makers to have a full production facility in the country, as it aims to meet fast-growing Chinese demand for commercial aircraft.

 

'Historic day'

 

"We will build a strong future with the China aviation industry, and for the China aviation industry," said Airbus chief executive Thomas Enders.

[eltib 54]

Hot News here you won't find on the Boeing Web Site.

 

Only 40% of Sea Launch was Executing Flawlessly. . .

 

Sea Launch seeks reorganization under Chapter 11

On Monday, June 22, Sea Launch filed a voluntary petition for relief

under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the U.S.

Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. Boeing is a 40 percent

partner in the Sea Launch international venture.

Boeing and the other Sea Launch partners support Sea Launch's effort

to explore restructuring alternatives through an orderly bankruptcy

court process. Sea Launch intends to maintain normal business

operations after the filing for reorganization.

Boeing employees at Sea Launch Home Port in Long Beach and those at

Boeing Commercial Space Company in Seattle will continue normal

operations for Sea Launch for the time being. The reorganization

process will determine if employee redeployments (meaning layoffs) are required.

Formed in 1995, Long Beach-based Sea Launch Company provides a direct

route to geostationary orbit for commercial communications satellites

through its launch site on the equator and also offers a land-based

service from the Baikonur Space Center in Kazakhstan.

Read the news release on Sea Launch's Chapter 11

http://bnn.ids.web.boeing.com/index.cfm?co...d=71282&bu=

 

Sea Launch Files Chapter 11 to Address Financial Challenges LONG BEACH, Calif., June 22, 2009 -

Sea Launch Company L.L.C. and Sea

Launch Limited Partnership and subsidiaries ("Sea Launch" or

"Company"), a leading provider of launch services to the commercial

satellite industry, has filed voluntary petitions to reorganize under

Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States

Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware in Wilmington.

The members of Sea Launch have unanimously determined that Chapter 11

reorganization is in the best interests of the Company, its customers,

shareholders, employees and other related parties.

Sea Launch intends to continue to maintain all normal business

operations after the filing for reorganization. Subject to court

approval, Sea Launch will initially use its cash balance to meet

operational requirements during the reorganization process and is

addressing Debtor in Possession financing, if necessary.

"We want to assure our customers, employees, suppliers and partners

that Sea Launch intends to continue to operate after the filing," said

Kjell Karlsen, president and general manager of Sea Launch. "Chapter

11 reorganization provides an opportunity for us to continue

operations and focus on building our future plans. We are grateful for

the continued support of our customers and partners while we focus on

reorganizing for the future."

In the court filing, Sea Launch listed assets of between $100 million

and $500 million against liabilities of between $500 million and $1

billion. Sea Launch's restructuring counsel is Alston & Bird, LLP

Edited June 24, 2009 by eltib

[Samsonite 181]

That's because you're paranoid. Nothing to do with the aeroplanes themselves.

Of course, I have to disagree.

In light of the recent Air France A330 crash and the other airbust crashes over the last couple of years there has been some discussion on the aviation sites as to whether or not the airbust fly-by-wire system depends entirely too much on the computers vs the Boeing system that allows the pilot to have the last say. We will probably never know exactly what caused the various accidents.

 

Some of the stuff I read on the Internet reminds me of that old saying about bars, i.e., "Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see." With that in mind, there is one guy who claims the Air France pilots were polled and the majority said they preferred Boeing to airbust because they were actually flying the Boeing aircraft, but were little more than "system managers" on the airbust aircraft.

Edited June 25, 2009 by Scalawag

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Some of the stuff I read on the Internet reminds me of that old saying about bars, i.e., "Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you see." With that in mind, there is one guy who claims the Air France pilots were polled and the majority said they preferred Boeing to airbust because they were actually flying the Boeing aircraft, but were little more than "system managers" on the airbust aircraft.

 

Their is one guy in the whole wide world who claims ............... jeez, even you can normally do better than that.

[Samsonite 181]

They should ask the Australian government for information on a incident which injured.. what was it... 70 passengers?

**********

 

"DATE:25/06/09

SOURCE:Air Transport Intelligence news

Two A330 airspeed and altitude incidents under NTSB scrutiny

By Lori Ranson

 

The US National Transportation Safety Board today said it is investigating two recent incidents involving possible malfunctioning of airspeed and altitude indications in the cockpits of Airbus A330 aircraft.

 

Four days after the 1 June crash of an Air France Airbus A330 off the coast of Brazil, French investigators confirmed automatic messages transmitted by the aircraft show the jet was experiencing conflicting airspeed information from onboard sensors.

 

The first incident under NTSB scrutiny occurred on 21 May, and involved a TAM A330 operating from Miami to Sao Paulo, Brazil. The A330 experienced a loss of primary speed altitude in cruise. Initial reports indicate the crew observed an abrupt drop in indicated outside air temperature followed by the loss of the air data reference system. Both the autopilot and autothrust disconnected, and speed and altitude information were lost.

 

NTSB says the TAM flight crew used backup instruments, and primary data was restored in five minutes. The flight landed in Sao Paulo with no further incidents.

 

"The safety board has become aware of another possibly similar incident that occurred on June 23 on a Northwest Airlines A330 flying between Hong Kong and Tokyo," says NTSB. "The aircraft landed safely in Tokyo; no injuries or damage was reported."

 

Investigators are collecting data recorder information, aircraft condition monitoring system messages, and weather information from the flight."

 

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/...under-ntsb.html

Edited June 26, 2009 by Scalawag

[wacmedia 277]

Hi,

 

Talking of Australia. Maybe no need to build this plane with all these cancellations ?

 

Qantas cancels Dreamliner order

 

Australian airline Qantas has cancelled an order for 15 of Boeing's Dreamliner 787 aircraft.

 

The cancellation came after Boeing this week delayed the launch of the Dreamliner for the fifth time.

 

Qantas said it revoked its $3bn (£1.8bn) order because of the worsening economic environment, not the delays.

 

Qantas made the order in December 2005. The "operating environment for the world's airlines has clearly changed dramatically since then," Qantas said.

 

The long-range, medium-sized Dreamliner is already more than two years behind schedule.

 

The airline's maiden flight had been due to take place on 30 June, but Boeing said it had now been delayed because of a need to reinforce a side section of the plane.

 

Boeing has received more than 800 orders for the Dreamliner, the planemaker's fastest selling model.

 

The Dreamliner is Boeing's first completely new aircraft since 1995.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Hi,

 

Talking of Australia. Maybe no need to build this plane with all these cancellations ?

 

I think it's reasonable to assume that there will be well in excess of 100 cancellations this year alone.

[Samsonite 181]

I think it's reasonable to assume that there will be well in excess of 100 cancellations this year alone.

airbust had 119 cancellations last year (2008).

Edited June 26, 2009 by Scalawag

[Samsonite 181]

...Maybe no need to build this plane with all these cancellations?

After the Qantas cancellation there are still 850 on order not counting options.

 

"Qantas cancels 15 787s, defers 15 others

Posted at 6/26/2009 5:21 AM CDT

 

Qantas, the biggest airline customer for the Boeing 787, has cancelled 15 of the 65 units had on order and has deferred deliveries of its first 15, blaming economic weakness but not the latest program delay.....

....The latest 787 program delay, a first-flight deferral announced on June 23, did not influence the decision, Qantas says, implying that it had already made up its mind.

 

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blogs/comme...de-ac241507ddc2

Edited June 26, 2009 by Scalawag

[Samsonite 181]

Their is one guy in the whole wide world who claims ............... jeez, even you can normally do better than that.

Well, I didn't know quite how to get down to your level, but I gave it a go.

[Samsonite 181]

I meant that the SQ and QR products were very good, the aircraft is irrelevant.

A good friend spent 21 years flying jumbo jets before he retired, including the Boeing 747 and the airbust A340. It was just a job to him (I don't think he has any idea how lucky he was) and he really didn't care for it, which is why, IMHO, he preferred airbust products, but he did say that Boeing aircraft do have a smoother ride than airbust airliners.

 

He would also readily admit when flying the A340 he was a "systems manager" or "computer operator" not really a pilot.

He spent 60% of his time in the cockpit monitoring the LCD screens and when practicing emergency maneuvers in the

simulators they weren't practicing how to fly the plane, but what to tell the computer to do in a given situation.

Does sound like a computer operator, doesn't it?

Edited June 26, 2009 by Scalawag

[Samsonite 181]

Admin. Please delete. Duplicate.

Thanks.

Edited June 26, 2009 by Scalawag