A blogger whos name cant be posted on this site but he can be found at www.flightglobal.com has posted a very interesting document compiled by Airbus about the 787 progress. No doubt there will be a lot of interesting information and no doubt we will see a lot of complaints from befenders about how Airbus compiled this document trying to make that that the issue instead of what the document says.
That sure is an interesting issue and should be discussed but I'm sure the 46 page document will be even more interesting. Suggest you head over and get a copy before it is pulled.
Full Version: Airbus Dreamliner Dossier Revealed
QUOTE (Falcon @ Dec 4 2008, 03:42 AM) 
A blogger whos name cant be posted on this site but he can be found at www.flightglobal.com has posted a very interesting document compiled by Airbus about the 787 progress. No doubt there will be a lot of interesting information and no doubt we will see a lot of complaints from befenders about how Airbus compiled this document trying to make that that the issue instead of what the document says.
That sure is an interesting issue and should be discussed but I'm sure the 46 page document will be even more interesting. Suggest you head over and get a copy before it is pulled.
That sure is an interesting issue and should be discussed but I'm sure the 46 page document will be even more interesting. Suggest you head over and get a copy before it is pulled.
Turns out that Blogger is not accessible to me today, neither is flightglobal. Wonder if it has anything to do with this?
QUOTE (johnny stick @ Dec 5 2008, 10:57 AM)
QUOTE (Falcon @ Dec 4 2008, 03:42 AM)
A blogger whos name cant be posted on this site but he can be found at www.flightglobal.com has posted a very interesting document compiled by Airbus about the 787 progress. No doubt there will be a lot of interesting information and no doubt we will see a lot of complaints from befenders about how Airbus compiled this document trying to make that that the issue instead of what the document says.
That sure is an interesting issue and should be discussed but I'm sure the 46 page document will be even more interesting. Suggest you head over and get a copy before it is pulled.
That sure is an interesting issue and should be discussed but I'm sure the 46 page document will be even more interesting. Suggest you head over and get a copy before it is pulled.
Turns out that Blogger is not accessible to me today, neither is flightglobal. Wonder if it has anything to do with this?
I just got to both sites without any issues...
QUOTE (russtom @ Dec 5 2008, 10:15 AM)
QUOTE (johnny stick @ Dec 5 2008, 10:57 AM)
QUOTE (Falcon @ Dec 4 2008, 03:42 AM)
A blogger whos name cant be posted on this site but he can be found at www.flightglobal.com has posted a very interesting document compiled by Airbus about the 787 progress. No doubt there will be a lot of interesting information and no doubt we will see a lot of complaints from befenders about how Airbus compiled this document trying to make that that the issue instead of what the document says.
That sure is an interesting issue and should be discussed but I'm sure the 46 page document will be even more interesting. Suggest you head over and get a copy before it is pulled.
That sure is an interesting issue and should be discussed but I'm sure the 46 page document will be even more interesting. Suggest you head over and get a copy before it is pulled.
Turns out that Blogger is not accessible to me today, neither is flightglobal. Wonder if it has anything to do with this?
I just got to both sites without any issues...
Me too.
Interesting but not Earth shattering. Nonetheless, it would seem AB may have some 'splaneing to do....
QUOTE (jimc @ Dec 5 2008, 02:09 PM)
Interesting but not Earth shattering. Nonetheless, it would seem AB may have some 'splaneing to do....
Whoever leaked the document certainly do.
QUOTE (Falcon @ Dec 5 2008, 01:19 PM)
QUOTE (jimc @ Dec 5 2008, 02:09 PM)
Interesting but not Earth shattering. Nonetheless, it would seem AB may have some 'splaneing to do....
Whoever leaked the document certainly do.
I would say so. They might be advised to set up housekeeping at a federal jail.
QUOTE (dander @ Dec 5 2008, 05:00 PM)
QUOTE (Falcon @ Dec 5 2008, 01:19 PM)
QUOTE (jimc @ Dec 5 2008, 02:09 PM)
Interesting but not Earth shattering. Nonetheless, it would seem AB may have some 'splaneing to do....
Whoever leaked the document certainly do.
I would say so. They might be advised to set up housekeeping at a federal jail.
And then there are the folks that gave the Boeing sensitive data to Airbus. Maybe some airline customers or Boeing might need to clean house. If these are powerpoint charts, many times it is possible to trace them back to their origin and who or what computer sourced them into a new document.
I just got back from a road trip and saw the thing for the first time.
My first reaction was that not only has Flight Global alienated themselves with Lockheed-Martin (due to a certain blogger's weekly "revelations" about the F-35) now they went and done it with Boeing, and most likely Airbus. These are large advertising accounts....
My first reaction was that not only has Flight Global alienated themselves with Lockheed-Martin (due to a certain blogger's weekly "revelations" about the F-35) now they went and done it with Boeing, and most likely Airbus. These are large advertising accounts....
QUOTE (rhapsody @ Dec 5 2008, 09:15 PM)
And then there are the folks that gave the Boeing sensitive data to Airbus. Maybe some airline customers or Boeing might need to clean house.
Doubt anything will happen in either case. Frankly the document contains very little that wasn't already public in some way. It is just a good collection of otherwise disperse data.
In my mind the biggest surprise is that the fastener fix allegedly violates an Airbus owned patent. Not sure how long time they have to file but it is clear they are aware of it so the clock is ticking.
QUOTE (rhapsody @ Dec 5 2008, 08:15 PM)
QUOTE (dander @ Dec 5 2008, 05:00 PM)
QUOTE (Falcon @ Dec 5 2008, 01:19 PM)
QUOTE (jimc @ Dec 5 2008, 02:09 PM)
Interesting but not Earth shattering. Nonetheless, it would seem AB may have some 'splaneing to do....
Whoever leaked the document certainly do.
I would say so. They might be advised to set up housekeeping at a federal jail.
And then there are the folks that gave the Boeing sensitive data to Airbus. Maybe some airline customers or Boeing might need to clean house. If these are powerpoint charts, many times it is possible to trace them back to their origin and who or what computer sourced them into a new document.
I imagine most of this stuff is covered by non-disclosure agreements. If companies are not going to enforce agreements, why bother having them?
Cross reference to tanker replacement for USAF.
The blogger who revealed the Airbus document also put out an article opining that these revelations could have adverse consequences for EADS in the tanker competition for the U.S. Air Force.
Flight Global may have provided a gift to Boeing's congressional supporters!
And it won't stop with the tanker. EADS will have to deal with these issues each time it competes for any U.S. Department of Defense contract with any U.S. company, be it Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, et al.
I just may have to start a thread on this subject!
Edit. I started a thread on the implications for the tanker and other (U.S.) defense contracts here:
http://www.fleetbuzz.com/forums//index.php...t=0#entry106136
The blogger who revealed the Airbus document also put out an article opining that these revelations could have adverse consequences for EADS in the tanker competition for the U.S. Air Force.
Flight Global may have provided a gift to Boeing's congressional supporters!
And it won't stop with the tanker. EADS will have to deal with these issues each time it competes for any U.S. Department of Defense contract with any U.S. company, be it Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, et al.
I just may have to start a thread on this subject!
Edit. I started a thread on the implications for the tanker and other (U.S.) defense contracts here:
http://www.fleetbuzz.com/forums//index.php...t=0#entry106136
QUOTE (Aurora @ Dec 9 2008, 05:48 PM)
And it won't stop with the tanker. EADS will have to deal with these issues each time it competes for any U.S. Department of Defense contract with any U.S. company, be it Boeing, Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, et al.
Guess it puts Airbus and Boeing on more equal footing, link.
Flight Global proclaims Boeing the "winner" in all this. I agree. That probably wasn't their intent when they disclosed these documents, but long term this is going to hurt EADS in their defense business. Note the article has no by line.
These conclusions are bound to disappoint some who thought that the "gotcha" moment would prove very damaging for Boeing and result in 787 cancellations. Unintended consequences after all. . . .
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/...ic-rivalry.html
These conclusions are bound to disappoint some who thought that the "gotcha" moment would prove very damaging for Boeing and result in 787 cancellations. Unintended consequences after all. . . .
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/...ic-rivalry.html
QUOTE
Despite damaging assertions about the 787, Boeing is clearly the winner in this round. By reading it, Boeing is afforded the rare privilege of learning exactly what its rival thinks it knows about the example of the 787. Perhaps more important, Boeing is allowed to see what Airbus doesn't know about the 787. In Seattle, any gaps in Airbus's knowledge could be even more instructive.
The document appears to betray some Airbus sources and methods, which at least raises questions about the airframer's code of ethics for intelligence gathering.
No-one begrudges Airbus's right to collect information about its competitor. But it does not explain how it obtained a series of internal Boeing charts marked "proprietary" - an omission that could haunt it in the US Air Force tanker competition.
Boeing, too, can learn lessons from Airbus intelligence.
The document appears to betray some Airbus sources and methods, which at least raises questions about the airframer's code of ethics for intelligence gathering.
No-one begrudges Airbus's right to collect information about its competitor. But it does not explain how it obtained a series of internal Boeing charts marked "proprietary" - an omission that could haunt it in the US Air Force tanker competition.
Boeing, too, can learn lessons from Airbus intelligence.
Neat article, Aurora. Particularly this part:
"... Airbus analyzed a public lecture given on 13 November 2007 by Al Miller, 787 Director of Technology Integration, regarding the Dreamliner at University of Washington. Airbus recreated a graph by Mr. Miller detailing the material lay-down rates. His chart assumed material could be laid-down with a 2006 demonstrated rate of 80 lbs/hour with a single-head machine..."
Al Miller and I go back a ways. He used to be my 3rd level manager and I remember a lot of great (and long) conversations together. He's one of the "good ones" around here who not only have a deep technical background but also have a strong understanding of the business world. He's a sharp fella and a great, garrulous personality. He's a distinct rarity in a field filled with corporate drones who haven't had a deep or original thought since grammar school.
Good to hear he's still out there.
B~
"... Airbus analyzed a public lecture given on 13 November 2007 by Al Miller, 787 Director of Technology Integration, regarding the Dreamliner at University of Washington. Airbus recreated a graph by Mr. Miller detailing the material lay-down rates. His chart assumed material could be laid-down with a 2006 demonstrated rate of 80 lbs/hour with a single-head machine..."
Al Miller and I go back a ways. He used to be my 3rd level manager and I remember a lot of great (and long) conversations together. He's one of the "good ones" around here who not only have a deep technical background but also have a strong understanding of the business world. He's a sharp fella and a great, garrulous personality. He's a distinct rarity in a field filled with corporate drones who haven't had a deep or original thought since grammar school.
Good to hear he's still out there.
B~
"public lecture"
QUOTE (Falcon @ Dec 11 2008, 03:04 PM)
"public lecture"
Right. That's why I'm not sure what the big hub bub is all about. It's not like there are any OMG's! in any of this.
B~
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.