Tweet
Boeing has alot of military contracts for all sorts of equipment and services worlwide too. They are famous for their commercial airliners but that is hardly the only think the company dabbles in, though admittedly commerical airlines is their biggest piggybank. Lossing the lead in the market and going bankrupt are far from similar.
-
"The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously. -
To be honest, I doubt Boeing really had a chance.
The RAF just doesn't use Boeing aircraft - apart from the highly excellent E3 Sentry - and even there GEC Marconi spent an absolute fortune trying to develop an alternative.
That contract only went to Boeing went it became clear the Brit alternative would be more expensive and under spec.
Add in the nasty habit of BaE Systems under bidding for contracts (and then going over budget) and you can see why Boeing just didn't have a realistic chance.
I can't say I'm upset about it though - although I do have a sneaking suspicion that BaE are a bit like Nortel. No matter how much money they lose, they'll always be propped up as a vested interest.Some cry `Allah O Akbar` in the street. And some carry Allah in their heart.
"The CIA does nothing, says nothing, allows nothing, unless its own interests are served. They are the biggest assembly of liars and theives this country ever put under one roof and they are an abomination" Deputy COS (Intel) US Army 1981-84Comment
-
The long term future of military aircraft is pilotless after the generation of fighters now entering service. Boeing are well placed in that field.
They clearly took their eye off the ball in the civil airliner field. Not necessarily the end but they have to go away and think very hard about the way forward.Never give an AI an even break.Comment
-
You have a good 100 years untill you have true pilotless aircraft. The ones we have now are recon platforms or novelties. Can't compete with a human pilot in fighter/strike role by any stretch of the imagination. But yes, Boeing is much more diversified as far as spreading assets between military/civilian interests than Airbus."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
-
It is already technically possible to build a fighter that can manouver at higher G than a human being can withstand. All they need is to sort out a remote control system. The F22, Eurofighter, etc. will give them 20 to 30 years to do so.
I would not be surprised to see civil airliners flown by computer and without pilots within 20 years.Never give an AI an even break.Comment
-
Go Airbus !!! The evil imperalist yankee firm bites the dust !!!
More seriously, even if Airbus is almost sure to lead the market until the end of the decade, Boeing will certainly not sink. Indeed the companies have no interest in it : an unique firm with a monopoly could raise his prices without problem, while a solid competitor will lower them. See the processors prices since AMD challenges Intel for example
"An eye for eye only ends up making the whole world blind" - GandhiComment
-
I think the larger a company gets, the more conservative it tends to get. Why gamble big when you're in the lead? Nah, minimize risk and hang on. But ah, there's the catch. That doesn't always work.
-Arriangrog want tank...Grog Want Tank... GROG WANT TANK!
The trick isn't to break some eggs to make an omelette, it's convincing the eggs to break themselves in order to aspire to omelettehood.Comment
-
whats ailing boeing is that airbus is subsidized entirely by the gov't.Originally posted by Spiffor
Maybe the quality/cost ratio of their planes isn't that great?
its like competing against france germany and britain.
its nice to know that another GOVERNMENT CONSORTIUM has overtaken boeing for a contract.Comment
-
Equal? Airbus has surpasses Boeing in sales ages ago.Originally posted by Spiffor
It's good to see Airbus is finally in the process of becoming equals with Boeing
Comment
-
boeing was probably correct in that there is no way THEY could have built a double decker and made money. a large % of the cost of the jumbo is being subsidized by european taxpayers.Originally posted by Colon
I'm not interested in silly nationalism bites.
What fascinates me about Boeing is that this company made huge gambles in the past to build revolutionary new planes, the 707 (world's first commercial jet airplane) and the 747 are good examples. Only a couple of years ago it seemed they'd establish a monopoly by merging with McDonnel Douglas.
These days they've been too chicken**** to rise to the challenge of Airbus' superjumbo and they've lost their market leadership in large civilian aviation. Next to that they've been embroiled in a bribery scandal and now they're getting a big blow in a market that was previously almost solely theirs.
So as case of study in corporate management: what's ailing Boeing?Comment
-
Meanwhile Airbus went ahead with A3XX the largest plane to be built in world history. It is a gamble but the initial pre - orders are encouraging. We'll see.Comment
-
I agree it is very polarized. I assure u americans dont like losing jobs to uber subsidized french industry(I've talked to them).Originally posted by DeathByTheSword
well a nice story about politics in the aircraft business:
when suadi-arabia wanted to change its aging fleet of boeings they looks at airbus and boeing deals. they picked the airbus one...then the president of boeing called the president of the US with something like: 'we are losing that contract that means people without jobs and that is bad for you'. then the US president called the boss in suadi and told him something like: 'you buy american or you wont get military support'. after that call they bought boeing planes although the airbuss ones were more fit for that particulair job.
the major problem with the aerospace business is that it is so polarized. so that you get the 'us' and 'them' feeling
this is pretty common tho. france protects its car industry viciously. it bails out its crappy engineers. and it throws money at airbus. viacomm goes around buying everyone(which was a dumb idea). then we all learn its a dumb idea. but thats ok, cuz they're french. so here comes the french gov't.
french companies are awful. they're a drag on competition and a bore to efficiency.Comment
-
"entirely". ProbablyOriginally posted by yavoon
whats ailing boeing is that airbus is subsidized entirely by the gov't.
I guess they make no money whatsoever because they simply give away the planes, but Boeing ones are so superior some still pay big bucks to buy them
In your opinion, how much of the 19.4 bil. € of this year's turnover are subsidies from the State? I'm very curious..."I have been reading up on the universe and have come to the conclusion that the universe is a good thing." -- Dissident
"I never had the need to have a boner." -- Dissident
"I have never cut off my penis when I was upset over a girl." -- DisComment
-
it wasn't a gamble at all. airbus' future was never once in jeopardy.Originally posted by paiktis22
Meanwhile Airbus went ahead with A3XX the largest plane to be built in world history. It is a gamble but the initial pre - orders are encouraging. We'll see.
it could have failed, but it wasn't a gamble.Comment
-
Imagine fighting the Civ AI in air to air combat, I will give the edge to the human.
Of course abolish war and settle disputes with a good game of chess, well them maybe I'd trust a computer for that."The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.Comment
Comment