http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=con...id=aWF101p0qV50

A380 delays causing EADS a loss? NO SH!T!

Quite frankly, this repetitive bow and arrow action at the A380 is now boring.

Why doesnt it admit the truth for a change?

The truth? Can you handle the truth? The truth is: the dollar vs euro imbalance is causing EADS all it's problems. It's the evil Americans out to destroy Airbus. These foolish unions should just shut up, take the job cuts, and get on with their lives. Gallois and Company know what's best for them. Wait a minute...my therapist is calling. I'll be back.
Edit: It wasn't my therapist. It was the French finance minister from Planet Airbus saying that if the Germans would get out of the way, the French could make things right. Here's more info:
http://yahoo.reuters.com/news/articlehybri...News&rpc=44

Amazing that all these troubles were there during Forgeards reign, yet nothing was done to stop the bleeding. Power8 adds salt to a gaping wound and resolves nothing at all.

It’s fairly routine for a major manufacturer to have some glitch somewhere along the road and have a temporary loss. B of course had its event with the ramp-up disaster, but the fundamentals then were better than the current situation at A. I see an increasing number of threads lately with headlines such as ‘China Looms as Threat to Boeing,’ etc. Thankfully for A, these types of hypothetical threats are still just ‘looming’ and not already realised.

^

Probably explains why Airbus is keen to stifle the Chinese threat by offloading cheap A32X's to the nations carriers, and then offer production work too.

Still, the question remains whether either avenue is of any financial benefit. In the absence of substance, and given the tumultuous 24 months EADS has had, Id favour the "no" option.

Newsweeks latest take on Airbus

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17553755/site/newsweek/

I wonder who these airlines are who want to wait a decade or more for a supposedly marginally "better" airplane? Better, as in, how much better the A345/6 were against the 77L/W?



Well Forgeard got his wish, albeit for reasons he didnt plan for...but his insider trading netted him a few extra retirement bucks eh...

May be one of the airlines that do not hold 787 delivery slots and would need to wait a decade to get one. Why should they go for second best when the waiting time is almost the same?

The base for the argument is that the newer airplane should be better so just how does your argument fit in?

*Should be* being the operative words- we can discuss it after EIS

“Should be” doesn’t explain your statement.
There are so many good arguments to be made. Rubbish like that is part of why this site is considered heavily pro Boeing.

Im sceptical of Mr Leahy's claim, not least because on the face of it, Boeings handicap at this time is that there is no second 787 line, nor is there one to be introduced as quickly as we may have envisaged.

If there were a second line, Im sure airlines that have not yet chosen between the that and the A350 would prefer to at least begin fleet renewal with whatever is available first- just as the case was with the A340-500, and the 777-200LR struggled for sales initially.

Furthermore, to be (rightfully) sceptical of Leahys A350's "better" claim is nothing to do with pro- "one" or anti- "the other"- its a cold fact that Airbus has over the last decade let customers down- ranging from the A318, A340 family and more recently the A380 and the indecision over the A350.

To me- being able to question the above doesnt make this site or the content pro-Boeing at all. If the press is publishing negative Airbus stories- then thats what is being discussed in discussion arena's the globe over. And if the press is highlighting the so far steadily-progressing 787 programme, then that is whats discussed- its deciphering the middle ground to get a balance, is it not?

Sure, Im an Airbus sceptic- but that doesnt constitute pro-Boeing-"ness"

Using the performance of the A345/6 that had EIS before 77L/W doesn’t support your argument and thus is just “bashing”. If the A345/6 had EIS after 77L/W then it would be a valid argument.

Just comparing model performance it could be argued that Airbus will outperform Boeing as the decade younger 737NG only managed to be on par with the A32S.

I do believe it is appropriate to be skeptical of Airbus performance and timeline claims but the arguments used should support the claim and not seem to be pulled out of a hat of readymade oneliners.

I understand that, and I apologise for not making this clearer- the unease I have about Leahy's statements is that the A345/6 promised much and delivered little. The same *could* happen to the A350-

The article sports fantastic views of the tail manufacturing process. I was surprised they are still the single carbon supplier and the Japanese location is not in the game yet. That tail still looks incomplete without the leading edge and rudder. As for the talk of EIS dictating ‘better’ or ‘worse,’ this has the potential to be misapplied rather fancifully for all varieties of arguments by any given ‘side’ of the argument. Clearly the underlying technology of the airframe, rather than EIS, is the only measure on which one can stake a claim of expected future performance. The prime question right now is what if the 350, with a much later EIS, in fact does not attain the level of the 787? As far as I can tell none have the answer to that question (Mr L’s apparent recent generalisation considered) until we simply have more details regarding the 350. But it’s a serious question that merits discussion.



I could reasonably apply the same criteria to conclude the world media right now appears to be pro–BCA. If one asks a different question (i. e., not from the perspective of elevating the merits of manufacturer A v manufacturer B), the answer is that AI is facing some serious underlying problems that has resulted in the proliferation of one kind of analysis, while the novelty of the 787 is churning out the rather different kinds of articles cited above about how this is going to impact the technologies and markets of aviation. Of course the media is also guilty of the black and white ‘BCA is better than AI’ sweeping statements that ignores the details and shades of grey that inevitably fail to give any present of historical manufacturer some overall ‘crown.’ I’m sure any sort of delay incurred by the 787 will see a brief spike of the lesser type of journalism that is gripping AI with jaws of steel, but again given the novelty of it all I could not blame the media for taking a more lenient attitude toward the 787, assuming any hypothetical such delay is modest, of course. More in line with reality, I suspect ‘teething’ problems may turn out to be the newsworthy issue with the 787 rather than some heretofore overlooked fatal flaw with the technology.

Article Courtesy Of Flight Global.com