Airbus and Boeing products running behind schedule

[Samsonite 181]

"Dr. Hans von Ohain and Sir Frank Whittle are both recognized as being the co-inventors of the jet engine. Each worked separately and knew nothing of the other's work. Hans von Ohain is considered the designer of the first operational turbojet engine. Frank Whittle was the first to register a patent for the turbojet engine in 1930. Hans von Ohain was granted a patent for his turbojet engine in 1936. However, Hans von Ohain's jet was the first to fly in 1939. Frank Whittle's jet first flew in in 1941."

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/When_was_the_jet_engine_invented

 

Mr. Sikorsky immigrated to the U.S. at the age of 30 and became an American citizen.

Edited May 23, 2010 by Samsonite

[wacmedia 277]

Another absolutely brilliant statement, wacky.

Do you even know what powers a "turbo" prop?

 

Hi,

 

I stuck the turbo part in and fair play you noticed it. I was going to say propeller but I'm a mischievous soul. The point I was making was that Europeans are the creators of modern aviation technology, BTW a great win for Airbus sponsored Toulouse in The European Rugby Final.

 

Toulouse lead French revolution with Heineken Cup final win against Biarritz

Toulouse 21 Biarritz 19

 

By Mick Cleary

Published: 6:30AM BST 24 May 2010

 

French revolution: Toulouse won the Heineken Cup final against Biarritz with a superb performance from their forwards, who dominated at the Stade de France

 

English fans may have to get used to the hollow-eyed stare. As the klaxons blared and the red and black Toulouse flags fluttered triumphantly around the Stade de France, the blank look and slumped shoulders of two Englishmen, Iain Balshaw and Magnus Lund, told their own tale.

 

Their torment was bound up in the moment, that sense of deflation that accompanies defeat in a final, the crumpled state of the vanquished.

 

 

"We were flat, we had no tempo, we lacked abrasiveness and just didn't play, didn't do ourselves justice," was Balshaw's frank assessment of his Biarritz side.

 

He was right. Despite the closeness of the scoreline, a nervous finale for Toulouse brought about by a Karmichael Hunt try seven minutes from time, Biarritz had been emasculated in the scrum long before that and left to feed on morsels.

 

But more than Biarritz's short-term misery, those charged with overseeing the well-being of the English game will have cause to take note of not just Toulouse's supremacy but also of the growing vibrancy of the French game.

 

This was not a vintage performance by Toulouse yet there is such a sense of burgeoning power across the Channel, a well-being, a feel-good mood generated by packed stadiums and deep pockets, that you wonder how long it will be before we see one English team in a European Cup final again, let alone two.

 

Of course, it was only 12 months ago that the French were contemplating their navel after only one side (Toulouse, naturellement) reached the quarter-finals. But the cyclical nature of these things is not a given, not when there are riches to spend in these parts. There will be a mass exodus of Kiwis, Australians and South Africans once next year's Rugby World Cup is over. And the ready money is on them heading to Euro-land.

 

One former All Black has already laid down his bed-roll and made good of his time in Toulouse, so much so that he was instrumental in bringing the European Cup to La Ville Rose for the fourth time. Scrum-half Byron Kelleher, 33, was tempted to return to New Zealand but, as the celebration songs echoed around the Stade de France on Saturday evening, he was glad that he had not.

 

"You ask those questions of yourself about going back home but it would have been too disruptive to my life," said Kelleher, the ever-whirring motor of the side. "It's great to win silverware. That's that I came here for. The level of rugby in France has grown dramatically. Others will come. The budget is attractive."

Toulouse have good habits as well as wealth. "We set out to use the scrum as a real weapon," said Kelleher. "We talked about it all week, using the scrum to gain points."

 

Toulouse gained six points directly from scrum penalties and exerted pressure from where three dropped goals were slotted, fly-half David Skrela finishing with 15 points and understated but hugely-effective centre Florian Fritz nabbing six points, three of them coming from a towering 60-metre first-half penalty.

 

The man with the plan was, as ever, Toulouse manager Guy Noves, overseeing his 15th European campaign. Noves is the antithesis of Jose Mourinho, a man without ego, without a flicker of showmanship in his bones, one who shuns the limelight and dismisses acclaim.

 

 

Toulouse have never lacked that self-belief. Within minutes of the final whistle they were sporting T-shirts embossed with the dates of their now four European titles. You would not bet against a new print pretty soon.

[Samsonite 181]

...The point I was making was that Europeans are the creators of modern aviation technology...

Well, two major contributions were the jet engine (English/German) and the swept wing (German),

but what else?

[jacko 8,776]

Well, two major contributions were the jet engine (English/German) and the swept wing (German),

but what else?

The world's first supersonic passenger plane.

Also the invention that allowed aircraft to go supersonic, the all moving tail.

The worlds first jet aircraft.....

The worlds firt jet passenger aircraft (De Havilland Comet).... the subsequent issue of metal fatigue was researched and surely imprived future designs.

 

The worlds first rocket powered passenger aircraft... Ente, Germany.

 

It seems strange to need to argue about this as at the time the USA was in infancy.

[Samsonite 181]

The world's first supersonic passenger plane.

Also the invention that allowed aircraft to go supersonic, the all moving tail.

The worlds first jet aircraft.....

The worlds firt jet passenger aircraft (De Havilland Comet).... the subsequent issue of metal fatigue was researched and surely imprived future designs.

 

The worlds first rocket powered passenger aircraft... Ente, Germany.

 

It seems strange to need to argue about this as at the time the USA was in infancy.

Not arguing, but curious.

 

By the end of WW II, the U.S. was hardly in "infancy."

 

The Concorde was the first supersonic passenger airliner, granted, but what is the "all moving tail"?

 

The first supersonic flights were done by the U.S. via the "X" series of experimental aircraft. Wasn't Chuck Yeager

the first pilot to break the sound barrier? I don't believe any of those aircraft or any of the military fighters of the

'50s, '60s, and into the '70s, had "moving tails.'

 

Three de Haviland Comets exploded in mid air before the metal fatigue issue around the square windows was discovered.

By then the Boeing 707 was flying and it was larger (carried more passengers) and could fly farther, higher, and faster, and

it, and the DC-8, pretty much flew away with de Haviland's market.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

The first supersonic flights were done by the U.S. via the "X" series of experimental aircraft. Wasn't Chuck Yeager

the first pilot to break the sound barrier?

 

Yes, but he couldn't drink champagne at the same time.

[jacko 8,776]

Not arguing, but curious.

 

By the end of WW II, the U.S. was hardly in "infancy."

 

The Concorde was the first supersonic passenger airliner, granted, but what is the "all moving tail"?

 

The first supersonic flights were done by the U.S. via the "X" series of experimental aircraft. Wasn't Chuck Yeager

the first pilot to break the sound barrier? I don't believe any of those aircraft or any of the military fighters of the

'50s, '60s, and into the '70s, had "moving tails.'

 

Three de Haviland Comets exploded in mid air before the metal fatigue issue around the square windows was discovered.

By then the Boeing 707 was flying and it was larger (carried more passengers) and could fly farther, higher, and faster, and

it, and the DC-8, pretty much flew away with de Haviland's market.

You can look up the moving tail, also called a stabilator.

Both the USA and Britain were involved in a race to be the first supersonic flight... and both reached an impass of excessive vibration, The P51 demonstrated this and the term compressibility phenomena was born. The swept back leading edge wing was a key development, which I believe was British. The British lost the taste for the supersonic race and passed a lot of data to the USA, this was caused by the death of Geoffrey de Havilland , September 1946.

 

The first (singular) supersonic flight was indeed Chuck....

I did not claim the Comet was the best, just the first, and after the disasters of the Comet, anything would come along and look good. But the 707 had the advantage of being pre-warned of the design flaws and unforseen issues from the Comet.

Edited May 25, 2010 by jacko

[Samsonite 181]

You can look up the moving tail, also called a stabilator.

Ah, you mean the one piece horizontal stabilizer. Yes, it is even used on some small general aviation piston engine aircraft.

 

...The swept back leading edge wing was a key development, which I believe was British...

The concept was British and some early swept wing bi-planes were built, but the Germans were the first to use it in regard to jet flight.

 

...But the 707 had the advantage of being pre-warned of the design flaws and unforseen issues from the Comet...

Perhaps, but the U.S. started building swept wing jet aircraft as soon as the war was over and the Boeing B-47 first flew 1947.

[BigDUSA 71]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. House of Representatives approved a Boeing Co-backed bill that would force consideration of illegal subsidies in the multibillion-dollar race between Boeing and Europe's EADS to sell refueling aircraft to the U.S. Air Force.

 

The lopsided 410 to 8 vote marked a victory for Chicago-based Boeing in its drive for a deal to build an initial 179 tanker aircraft potentially worth up to $50 billion.

 

Companion legislation must be passed by the Senate before it can be signed into law or vetoed by President Barack Obama.

 

Boeing and EADS, the corporate parent of Boeing's commercial archrival, Airbus, are locked in an increasingly bitter race over the U.S. Air Force deal.

 

Boeing earlier this week accused EADS of courting Iran and other countries at odds with the United States and said this should be taken into account in the tanker competition, too.

 

The measure passed by the House would require the Defense Department to consider any "unfair competitive advantage that an offeror may possess" in evaluating bids on major weapons systems.

 

The term "unfair competitive advantage" means a situation in which the cost of development, production, or manufacturing is not fully borne by the offeror for the contract, the amendment to a defense spending bill said.

 

A World Trade Organization (WTO) panel, in a final ruling in March, faulted billions of dollars of European subsidies to Airbus, including, according to U.S. lawmakers briefed on the matter, almost $5 billion used to develop the A330, EADS' tanker frame.

 

A WTO panel is expected to make an interim ruling by the end of next month on a European Union counter-complaint that Boeing has unfairly benefited from U.S. federal, state and local subsidies.

 

NINE-YEAR SAGA

 

It was not immediately clear how the legislation adopted late Thursday would apply to any WTO finding that Boeing also unfairly gained from subsidies. But any such final ruling may not come soon enough to figure in the tanker saga, which has dragged on for nearly nine years.

 

Bids are due July 9 and the Pentagon has told the bidders to be ready to start work by November 12 if chosen for the deal.

 

This round of competition is the third time the Air Force has sought to start replacing its KC-135 tankers, which average about 50 years old.

 

The first, in 2004, would have been a lease-buy deal with Boeing, but it collapsed after two Boeing officials were convicted of conflict-of-interest violations, one of them the Air Force's former No. 2 arms buyer.

 

A team of EADS and Northrop Grumman Corp won a 179-plane deal in 2008, but Boeing successfully protested the award, leading to the current round.

 

Rep. Jay Inslee of Washington, one of the measure's sponsors, said Republicans and Democrats could be united in a "simple proposition" as lawmakers considered the measure.

 

"We will never allow foreign competitors to steal American jobs by using illegal subsidies, then reward them by allowing the use of those illegal subsidies to win a contract worth tens of billions of dollars," said Inslee, whose state is home to the Boeing production line for the 767 wide body that would be converted into a tanker.

 

The Defense Department has maintained that it is barred from unilateral retaliatory action for violations of international trade rules.

 

"That is the purview of the WTO," Geoff Morrell, Defense Secretary Robert Gates chief spokesman, said May 13. "If we were to do so, we would then be in violation of WTO rules and subject to disciplinary action."

 

Boeing cheered the vote, saying it was entirely appropriate for lawmakers to take steps to prevent the U.S. defense industrial base "from suffering the same fate as the commercial aircraft industry, where illegal subsidies have contributed to the loss of tens of thousands of U.S. aerospace jobs."

 

"We fully support the efforts of all members of Congress who share our concern about the unfair competitive advantage that EADS/Airbus, a foreign company, gained from decades of illegal launch aid subsidies worth billions of dollars," a Boeing statement said.

 

EADS North American arm, which would be the prime contractor for its Airbus-based tanker, said it believed the Defense Department should be allowed to run "the fair and open competition to which it is committed."

 

"We leave it to the Department to comment on the extent to which this or any legislation impacts that objective," James Darcy, a company spokesman, said by email.

 

The Defense Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

 

The Defense Authorization bill, as approved by the House, also included a provision that would bar Pentagon fuel purchases from companies that have been sanctioned for doing business with Iran's energy industry.

QUOTE

 

It's refreshing to see true bi-partisan support for Boeing.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

It's refreshing to see true bi-partisan support for Boeing.

 

It's called xenophobic protectionism.

 

"Todd Tiahrt, a Republican congressman from Kansas, said it was “outrageous to even consider outsourcing thousands of jobs to a foreign company” when the unemployment rate was close to 10 per cent.

 

“We need an American tanker built by an American company with American workers,” said Mr Tiahrt."

Edited May 28, 2010 by CheshireTom

[MrMango 665]

It's called xenophobic protectionism.

 

"Todd Tiahrt, a Republican congressman from Kansas, said it was “outrageous to even consider outsourcing thousands of jobs to a foreign company” when the unemployment rate was close to 10 per cent.

 

“We need an American tanker built by an American company with American workers,” said Mr Tiahrt."

Why?

 

We need the best plane at the lowest price....

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Why?

 

We need the best American plane at any price....

 

I agree.

Edited May 28, 2010 by CheshireTom

[wacmedia 277]

We need the best plane at the lowest price....

 

Hi,

 

A first. I agree with Mango.

[Samsonite 181]

Why?

 

We need the best plane at the lowest price....

Have to disagree. Defense related equipment should not be purchased from any foreign supplier, especially the French who can't be trusted any farther than you can throw a bottle of Vichy water.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Have to disagree. Defense related equipment should not be purchased from any foreign supplier, especially the French who can't be trusted any farther than you can throw a bottle of Vichy water.

 

See! Xenophobic protectionism.

[MrMango 665]

Have to disagree. Defense related equipment should not be purchased from any foreign supplier, especially the French who can't be trusted any farther than you can throw a bottle of Vichy water.

Again, why?

Assuming the quality is OK and it meets the specs, They owe the taxpayers to buy the best value, no matter who the Suppler is.

[joekicker 53]

the subsequent issue of metal fatigue was researched and surely imprived future designs.

 

"Researched". Heh, I like that. It's so... neutral.

 

.

[Samsonite 181]

Again, why?

Assuming the quality is OK and it meets the specs, They owe the taxpayers to buy the best value, no matter who the Suppler is.

How are you going to get parts if you go to war with the country of origin, or that country takes sides with your enemy, or the parts can't get to you due to some sort of conflict or embargo by a third country, etc., etc., etc. ?

[MrMango 665]

How are you going to get parts if you go to war with the country of origin, or that country takes sides with your enemy, or the parts can't get to you due to some sort of conflict or embargo by a third country, etc., etc., etc. ?

All very good questions, and I am sure the brass thought of them.

 

The fallacy of your argument is today, every airframe is international. Parts are sourced from all over the world by all company's.

 

Do you think that Boeing only uses American parts?

[Samsonite 181]

All very good questions, and I am sure the brass thought of them.

 

The fallacy of your argument is today, every airframe is international. Parts are sourced from all over the world by all company's.

 

Do you think that Boeing only uses American parts?

Good point and unfortunately true.

There are ways around it. For example, CPUs for security sensitive purposes are made, in small lots, under contract with American companies. IBM and Texas Instruments both have their own foundries. Perhaps the same should be done for all military equipment?

Edited June 1, 2010 by Samsonite

[eltib 54]

It's called xenophobic protectionism.

 

"Todd Tiahrt, a Republican congressman from Kansas, said it was “outrageous to even consider outsourcing thousands of jobs to a foreign company” when the unemployment rate was close to 10 per cent.

 

“We need an American tanker built by an American company with American workers,” said Mr Tiahrt."

 

 

It would have been built with American workers in Alabama, hadn't Northrop bailed out of it. Boeing on the other hand is good at sending jobs abroad.

[BigDUSA 71]

MOSCOW (Reuters) – U.S. aircraft maker Boeing (BA.N) has won an order from a Russian state company for up to 65 planes, nearly half its net order for 2009, beating European rival Airbus (EAD.PA) and a Russian manufacturer.

 

Buyer Russian Technologies, which operates carrier Rosavia and has a deal with Aeroflot (AFLT.MM) to buy aircraft on behalf of the flag carrier and lease them, said it would announce details of the order soon.

 

"In the near future, Russian Technologies in cooperation with Aeroflot (AFLT.MM) will issue specific orders for specific models," Russian Technologies said on its website (www.rostechnologii.ru).

 

Earlier, Russian Technologies said the tender, contested by Boeing, Russia's United Aircraft Corporation (OAK) and Airbus, was for 50 midrange narrowbody planes with an option for 15 more.

 

However, Aeroflot said it would continue buying from Airbus. It has chosen Airbus planes over Boeing in recent years, and analysts have said the carrier would have to make significant investment to accommodate new Boeing aircraft.

 

A spokesman for Aeroflot said it was looking at leasing another 15 Airbus A320s in addition to the three due for delivery this year and 13 between 2011 and 2013.

 

By the end of the year Aeroplot expects to operate 67 Airbus airliners.

 

Aeroflot said it could, however, consider the commercial merits of a Boeing deal.

 

"If Russian Technologies' offer (of Boeing aircraft) is in line with the market or below, we will consider it," the Aeroflot spokesman said by telephone.

 

The two carriers were slated to merge their fleets, creating a single national champion airline. Aeroflot is effectively managing some of Rosavia's holdings while they are prepared for formal takeover by Aeroflot.

 

Rosavia was created when Russian Technologies swept up the debris after the mass failure of a few remaining regional carriers, once known as "babyflots," which were created when the Soviet-era Aeroflot's monopoly was ended in the 1990s.

 

The head of Russian Technologies, Sergei Chemezov, has promised further orders to the United Aircraft Corporation.

 

The companies are under political pressure to buy new aircraft from the domestic industry, which is struggling to make good on a revival plan after a decade and a half of decay.

 

A new Russian model designed to spearhead that effort, the Superjet, has been repeatedly delayed.

 

"In addition, Russian Technologies will purchase domestically produced planes including the MS-21, AN-148 and Sukhoi Superjet from the United Aircraft Corporation," it said.

QUOTE

 

Nice firm order for 50 planes and options for an additional 15.

[BigDUSA 71]

PARIS (AFP) – US aircraft manufacturer Boeing outstripped European rival Airbus in the race for orders in the first five months of the year, figures from the companies showed Thursday.

 

From January to May, Airbus received 81 orders and eight cancellations, leaving a net total of 73.

 

Boeing in the same period received 139 orders and 28 cancellations for a net total of 111.

 

Airbus delivered 206 planes to customers from January to May while Boeing's deliveries came to 146 by the end of April.

 

Airbus is this year aiming to win 250 to 300 net orders and to deliver 480 to 500 planes

QUOTE

 

Not a bad lead for Boeing going into June.

[CheshireTom 1,377]

Not a bad lead for Boeing going into June.

 

Quite.

 

Airbus delivered 206 planes to customers from January to May while Boeing's deliveries came to 146 by the end of April.

[wacmedia 277]

Hi,

 

Great news for Airbus.

 

From Times Online June 8, 2010

 

Bigger, cheaper Emirates sets out to win battle for the skies

 

Emirates ratcheted up the pressure on Europe’s airlines yesterday, spending $11.5 billion on 32 new superjumbos that will enable it to grab market share and cut long-haul fares by up to half.

 

The Gulf airline’s Airbus order — the largest for commercial aircraft — will take its A380 fleet to 90, more than four times as large as the next operator Qantas.

 

The double-decker aircraft will add huge numbers of new seats on key routes such as London to Dubai, pushing down fares as capacity increases.

 

Emirates fares are already typically 25 to 50 per cent cheaper than those offered by European rivals. The additional capacity offered by the A380s could make it increasingly difficult for older flag carriers such as British Airways to compete on certain routes.