Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[BigDUSA 71]

IAM member does that tell you anything, wanker...?

 

They don't trade parts, WTF are you talking about...?

 

This isn't a part for a truck engine, many lives are at stake if it fails and you think they "trade" parts...?

If it failed, who is responsible...?

 

We traded for an engine fron Delta and put it on UA, it failed causing an emergency landing.

People were hurt and the reason was the engine failed.

 

Now with that said, who was responsible for that failed engine (UA or Delta)...?

Airlines stock many parts and AOG them to sites, for repairs.

 

Next time ask an airline employee, you might not have to makeup a story to look like an idiot

 

You didn't answer my question? Did you work in airplane maintenance division?

[wacmedia 277]

Hi,

 

As I've said before if I'm flying long haul prefer 4 engines whether its an Airbus or Boeing. Imagine an engine packing in with thousands of miles to the next airport.

[Greg_B 306]

You didn't answer my question? Did you work in airplane maintenance division?

 

Hey USPS truck driver, you never worked for an airline, did you..?

 

So STFU about operational things, as you don't know anything except where you sit your fat ass on a plane

Edited March 5, 2010 by Greg_B

[BigDUSA 71]

Hey USPS truck driver, you never worked for an airline, did you..?

 

So STFU about operational things, as you don't know anything except where you sit your fat ass on a plane

 

I'll take the above as a no.

[Greg_B 306]

I'll take the above as a no.

 

Take it anyway you want, I forgot more about Airline MTC/Operations than your dumbass will ever know

[eltib 54]

Hey USPS truck driver, you never worked for an airline, did you..?

 

So STFU about operational things, as you don't know anything except where you sit your fat ass on a plane

 

The answer is no. But BigD would also discredit me because I was once an IT worker in Boeing. But I have one up on him. I worked all around the hardware while I was there, so I got to learn about the specs of the products Boeing built.

 

Not to discredit Boeing on their planes, but I feel safer aboard a 747, than a 777, because of the extra 2 power-plants. Comes in real handy if a engine goes out halfway between Taipei, and Midway Island.

[eltib 54]

You didn't answer my question? Did you work in airplane maintenance division?

 

Doesn't prove shit BigD, or did you forget about AA191 and engines coming of the wing? I want you to answer why the engine fell off the wing

Edited March 5, 2010 by eltib

[eltib 54]

Well, like I've said before, that is why they are called "test flights."

BTW, it was Rolls Royce engine. Hmmm. Rolls...that is a British firm isn't it.

 

And that's why Boeing should have offered a choice of GE, P&W, and R&R. instead of the former and latter. Maybe the quality would be more up to snuff, with increased competition.

[Hub 203]

Another Airbust Bailout??

 

Once Again, Euro Taxpayers to the Rescue!!

 

More fuckups cause losses in 2009 for EADs. Meanwhile, Boeing was still profitable and yeilded a 4% dividend, despite delays and cancelled orders.

 

I have to admit, I may buy the EADs stock as the safety net is so inviting. The EADs stock price went up even with the loss, due to the bailout. (Kind of like putting Ronaldo on your EPL fantasy team last year because he was such a prick).

 

Hub

[TheFiend 1,192]

Another Airbust Bailout??

 

Nice to see my taxes being put to good use........ I would rather they are used on EADS than paying out dodgy expenses claims by politicians.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Another Airbust Bailout??

 

Once Again, Euro Taxpayers to the Rescue!!

 

More fuckups cause losses in 2009 for EADs. Meanwhile, Boeing was still profitable and yeilded a 4% dividend, despite delays and cancelled orders.

 

I have to admit, I may buy the EADs stock as the safety net is so inviting. The EADs stock price went up even with the loss, due to the bailout. (Kind of like putting Ronaldo on your EPL fantasy team last year because he was such a prick).

 

Hub

 

Hub,

 

It's a pittance compared to what the US government will ensure is pushed Boeing's way with the tanker nonsense.

Edited March 5, 2010 by CheshireTom

[eltib 54]

Nice to see my taxes being put to good use........ I would rather they are used on EADS than paying out dodgy expenses claims by politicians.

 

Or bailouts to AIG so they can vacation in lavish resorts.

[eltib 54]

Hub,

 

It's a pittance compared to what the US government will ensure is pushed Boeing's way with the tanker nonsense.

 

Tom,

 

I still hope Northrop reconsiders working with EADS on the KC-45 or KC-330. Maybe it won't help us in California, but neither is Boeing putting a secondary assembly line in South Carolina for 787 production.

 

Boeing cannot be winner by default, because they are the only manufacturer bidding. That's not the REAL American way.

[Hub 203]

Hub,

 

It's a pittance compared to what the US government will ensure is pushed Boeing's way with the tanker nonsense.

 

I think there is nonsense on both sides and your unequivocal assumption that the US gov will automatically defer to Boeing doesn't reflect reality.

 

Hub

[CheshireTom 1,377]

I think there is nonsense on both sides and your unequivocal assumption that the US gov will automatically defer to Boeing doesn't reflect reality.

 

Hub

 

I think we had this conversation a few years back. I don't think they'll automatically defer to Boeing, only that they won't award the contract to Northrop/EADS.

[Hub 203]

I think we had this conversation a few years back. I don't think they'll automatically defer to Boeing, only that they won't award the contract to Northrop/EADS.

 

We did have this conversation, but much has changed.

 

Your statement above is a bit conflicting isn't it?

 

At least the award of the contract is in question and the fact the US gov already tried to award it to EADs flies says differently.

 

Based on my holdings of BA, I can't say I don't hope that your prediction becomes reality. If BA's refueling plane is better they should get the contract, and EADs may not successfully respond to the RFP in light of their recent track record.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

We did have this conversation, but much has changed.

 

Your statement above is a bit conflicting isn't it?

 

Not really, the award of the contract to the French is what's unacceptable. It doesn't matter if it was BigD building the things out of balsa-wood in his backyard - that would be more politically acceptable than EADS.

 

At least the award of the contract is in question and the fact the US gov already tried to award it to EADs flies says differently.

 

The procurement people tried to award the contract to EADS, but that was politically unacceptable to their lords and masters. Just like I said.

 

Hub,

 

I'll be the first one to hold up my hands and admit that I called that wrong. All credit to the procurement people for staying focussed on choosing the best bit of kit for the job and ignoring the xenophobic furore that went beforehand and has intensified since. That said, given the comments since the award of the contract we're still someway away from the order being seen as being politically acceptable ......... which was the point of the post.

 

I must say that I'm disappointed that they didn't go for Rolls Royce engines though.

Edited March 6, 2010 by CheshireTom

[Hub 203]

Not really, the award of the contract to the French is what's unacceptable. It doesn't matter if it was BigD building the things out of balsa-wood in his backyard - that would be more politically acceptable than EADS.

 

 

 

The procurement people tried to award the contract to EADS, but that was politically unacceptable to their lords and masters. Just like I said.

 

 

Tom:

 

Correct me if am wrong, but it was not just that it was a political hot potato (which I agree), but that major errors were identified in bidding process (e.g., air force moving the goal posts during the bid process) and that is what caused the retraction of the award, not some ethereal "lords and masters" you refer to?

 

Your assumption/supposition on the pending award is just that - your opinion and guesswork.

 

What is fact is that EADs once again poured in a massive amount of bailout money from Euro governments to save the transport plane program, which does not lead to a level playing field.

 

What is also fact is that EADs will post a 2009 loss while Boeing was an efficient and profitable organization in 2009, yeilding a profit and a 4% dividend despite the delays in production. Which is nice for the kid!

 

The lucky thing for BA is that EADs probably won't even be able to afford the 100 million it will cost to put together a bid on the tankers, as they are pissing money away in too many other areas.

 

Hub

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Tom:

 

Correct me if am wrong, but it was not just that it was a political hot potato (which I agree), but that major errors were identified in bidding process (e.g., air force moving the goal posts during the bid process) and that is what caused the retraction of the award, not some ethereal "lords and masters" you refer to?

 

You've got to blame someone. They couldn't just say "Hang on, we're not going to give this to the cheese-eating, surrender monkeys", could they?

 

Your assumption/supposition on the pending award is just that - your opinion and guesswork.

 

It's been a pretty good guess, so far.

 

What is fact is that EADs once again poured in a massive amount of bailout money from Euro governments to save the transport plane program, which does not lead to a level playing field.

 

What is also fact is that EADs will post a 2009 loss while Boeing was an efficient and profitable organization in 2009, yeilding a profit and a 4% dividend despite the delays in production. Which is nice for the kid!

The lucky thing for BA is that EADs probably won't even be able to afford the 100 million it will cost to put together a bid on the tankers, as they are pissing money away in too many other areas.

 

I thought we done subsidies and the US done bailouts?

 

p.s. Fancy going halves on the US to beat England in the World Cup? The US are 11/2 (6.5 in your odds?) to win.

Edited March 6, 2010 by CheshireTom

[Hub 203]

You've got to blame someone. They couldn't just say "Hang on, we're not going to give this to the cheese-eating, surrender monkeys", could they?

 

If there is such a bias, why would did the air force give the contract to EADs in the first place? Wouldn't the "Lords and Masters" have given them their marching orders up front?

 

Contesting awards is not unusual; although admittedly only 1 of 3 are overturned.

 

You have to break out of the Euro serfdom mentality, we have a different system over here (other than that secret Jewish society you guys think runs everything )

 

It's been a pretty good guess, so far.

 

We'll have to disagree on that one.

 

I thought we done subsidies and the US done bailouts?

 

I acknowledge they happen in the US also, but I thought this thread was about Airbust and Boeing? On a comparison, it seems to the casual observer that subsidies and bailouts have favored one much more than the other.

 

p.s. Fancy going halves on the US to beat England in the World Cup? The US are 11/2 (6.5 in your odds?) to win.

 

I think I will be in for that, but the US just suffered a rash of injuries. Lets revisit when we get closer to June.

 

Hub

[CheshireTom 1,377]

You have to break out of the Euro serfdom mentality, we have a different system over here (other than that secret Jewish society you guys think runs everything )

 

Sorry,

 

I thought you were complaining about the Euro system. As for me, I'm under no illusions whatsoever of how your system works, or what the implications of that are. At least not any more so than your illusion of serfdoms.

 

As for the footie, can't you just borrow a couple of those giants from the basketball league and hoof the ball up to them to head a goal, or two?

[Hub 203]

Sorry,

 

I thought you were complaining about the Euro system. As for me, I'm under no illusions whatsoever of how your system works, or what the implications of that are. At least not any more so than your illusion of serfdoms.

 

As for the footie, can't you just borrow a couple of those giants from the basketball league and hoof the ball up to them to head a goal, or two?

 

Unfortunately not, or my nephew (6'5+"; D's brother) would still be playing professionally instead of coaching at university.

 

You don't have to be defensive about your history assumptions on bowing to lords and masters, I saw Braveheart , I know your history. That knee just starts bending by itself when that noble blood comes around.

[Hub 203]

Tom:

 

Let's be candid, that "euro system" is being changed to more closely match the US system; those 32-hour work weeks, endless vacation, and union members that can't be fired, out the window much to the chagrin of those CESMs you mentioned before.

 

Just purely looking at EAD's and Boeing's 2009 as an example, it seems apparent which system worked better in their case.

 

Hub

[Samsonite 192]

....As I've said before if I'm flying long haul prefer 4 engines whether its an Airbus or Boeing. Imagine an engine packing in with thousands of miles to the next airport....

It is called, ETOPS, Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standards. Two engines jetliners cannot be more than xxx number of minutes from the nearest airport.

While I would prefer a 4 engine plane for a long haul flight, the data generated over the years since two engine twin aisle jets first went into service has shown them to be every bit as reliable as four engine jets, if not more so.

Edited March 7, 2010 by Samsonite

[BigDUSA 71]

Not really, the award of the contract to the French is what's unacceptable. It doesn't matter if it was BigD building the things out of balsa-wood in his backyard - that would be more politically acceptable than EADS.

 

The procurement people tried to award the contract to EADS, but that was politically unacceptable to their lords and masters. Just like I said.

 

If I did build it out of balsa wood it wouldn't have taxpayer subsidies like EADS/AIRBUS.

 

Now your spinning a conspiracy theory when EADS loses. You need to man up to the fact that EADS isn't competitive even with EU taxpayer deep pockets.

 

1 day till wheels UP.........

Edited March 7, 2010 by BigDUSA