What's wrong at Airbus? Will the A380 sink the ship?

[pchang]

The key to the Very Light Jet will be companies like NetJets. If they get enough demand, the plane could be quite successful.

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Six? Um...

I don't think that'll ever overtake the seats 120+. You'd need 20 of these to make up for one 727, and the problem is, even with so many airports, you only have 3 airports in the chicago area that allow them to land iirc (with Meigs gone) and you can only take off one at a time

why would they need to compete with the huge jets? I can imagine that there is a market just below the uber-rich who can't afford their own jet. Actually, I could invision myself buying a piece of one of these in a few years and essentially operating it like a timeshare with other couples. It would be a cool way to jet down to FLA or mexico with 2 other couples. And this would work on the strip about a block from my apt in Indy, runway of 4200.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Asher
European Bureaucracy + European Management + European Engineering = lol

It is laughable until you get to the part about huge European subsidies.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by DanS
Meanwhile, the entrepreneurs at the startup Eclipse Aviation received FAA certification on the first Very Light Jet. It costs about $1.5 million apiece. About 2,500 orders already. Within range of most upper middle class folks via fractional ownership.

There are a half dozen American small jet makers along with various others spread around places like Canada, Brazil, and Europe. The small jet market is actually fairly easy to get into but the problem is the small jet market tends to be very cyclical with unpredictable boom and bust cycles and the liability is HUGE so many investors avoid it.

If you just look at light aircraft (nonjet) the industry is very unconsolidated with something like 1000 different manufacturers world wide covering just about every nitch imaginable.

[TCO]

How do you knkow all this shiiite , mhomesliulve?

[_BuRjaCi_]

Originally posted by Pekka
The problem with the Airbus is that it's not American. If it was, this would be ready, it would be twice as big in fact. The problem is, that the project is filled with French idiots who rather smell each others toes than actually work. They intentionally sabotage the work if they don't get their favourite bread every other day.

The problem with Airbus is that it's happening in Europe. God didn't bless Europe. Even less did God bless EU, pagan union and alliance.

The problem with Airbus is that if it succeeds, there must be some scam in it. It can't succeed. And even if it does, it'll be so expensive no one can buy it. It's a freak show that reflects quite well the stupidity, inferiority and intelligence of all Europeans, who are not only stupid but also sissie.

The fact is, if it has stars but no stripes, it smells like cheese and armpits, communism AND fascims at the same time. Basically, the recipe for success is missing. They're stupid. Idiots. Pagans.

That kind of post deserves only one response.

(sterotypicla french accent): Zee stupid Americains.

[_BuRjaCi_]

Originally posted by Pekka
But it's the truth. Saying EU will lead any project is investors worst nightmare. EU does not understand investing. It likes to invest. In fact EU likes investing so much, that they never ask anything in return. Would you like to see techwear on dogs? We'll invest in a project that aims to put CPU on dogs brains. We don't actually want to see it, but we'll invest in it. We all know it's a stupid idea but we just like to invest. If the project crew just instead uses the money to... sit around and argue which language should be the main language used, well it's kind of fun too. Worthy of that money.

Number one rule is, if nothing is happening, invest more and hire more people to run the show. If there's no open spots, ... invent them! Or would we rather see those people unemployed? It's a win-win. People have jobs and we might even get a dog with CPU attached to its brain.

Of course the Russians already knew how to do it, the Americans didn't but knew it wasn't worth investing into and the Japanese already did it.

But in the name of Le Blonc Chemonux, we will have a dog with chips in his brain, or at least the project. And the plan was cool.. Italians kept the accounting, French was in charge for the customer relations and the interface (available only in French), Germans added human warmness into it and Iceland was in charge for throwing th big party when the project was to be announced succesful. Can't go wrong.

You do know that some people on the planet think that you don't need to be the same color,religion and nationality in order to work together on an important project?

However I do admit that local nationalism, burocracy and some nations (I don't like to be allied with the Italians they are kind of incompetent and have never stayed on the same side for more than 5 minutes in a war) are holding us back.

But if only one of a hunred hig-tech things that the EU is financing works it'll be a great benifit to humanity (fusion pover, the gaia program, dogs that can play civ with the AI burnt on their hard disk ).

[_BuRjaCi_]

I can't get over this. Dogs need chips!
I'm writing to my representativs right away!!!

Think of all the wonderfull benifits to the world:
Civ playing dogs!!!
Newsreporting dogs (Fox and CNN).
Card playing dogs.
Dogs that are doctors!
Dogs that are politicians (if a horse and a dead man can do it so can our canine friends).
Dogs that rebbel and replace humanity!!!

[Dinner]

Boeing was having similiar problems in 2003 when they tried to launch a new large plane which would have traveled just below the speed of sound. The problem is it was expensive and they got few orders for it so they had to cancel the plane at the last minute. What made matters worse is Boeing delayed the 787 in order to design the now cancelled plane so that it's real market leader wasn't on the market as fast as it should have been.

The 787 is basically a bigger, faster, yet more fuel efficent, and cheaper to manufacture (fewer subsystems so there is less time involved in assembly) update of the 767. The 787 has been a huge hit so all Boeing has to do is continue making the 787 and not have any manufacturing delays and they'll do great.

[DanS]

The 787 seems very different than the 767. The 787 uses carbon composites extensively, new hull design, new engines, etc.

[CerberusIV]

It's too early to call the A380. If Airbus have got their predictions about the nature of air travel over the next decade or two right and the demand is for large capacity aircraft between continental hubs it won't/can't fail. If they are wrong and the demand is for smaller aircraft flying direct to the nearest airport to the passengers destination Boeing will clean up with the 787.

The deciding factors will be the price of oil, whether airlines have to pay more taxes per aircraft for their pollution and how fast airports expand (if you can't get any more planes in/out due to limits on flight slots the only way to get more passengers through is bigger planes).

[pchang]

Rolls Royce

has announced a 1 year delay of work on its engine for the A380.

[DanS]

If Airbus have got their predictions about the nature of air travel over the next decade or two right and the demand is for large capacity aircraft between continental hubs it won't/can't fail.

I disagree with this very much. In the airline manufacturing business, you can manufacture yourself into bankruptcy.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by DanS
Seats 6. Can land at over 10,000 airports in the U.S. May be a major passenger plane by making airtaxis possible.

Would these make very quick commuter flights along the east coast feasible?

[CerberusIV]

Originally posted by DanS


I disagree with this very much. In the airline manufacturing business, you can manufacture yourself into bankruptcy.

Either there is a demand for the product or there isn't. If there is Airbus will get the financial support (read subsidies) to get the planes delivered - and over a 30 to 40 year product run (cf the 747) make a profit or if there isn't the demand they will have to cut production short and build something else.

I can already hear the complaints from (mainly) US posters about subsidies and market distortion. The simple reality is the European governments, particularly the French, have spent a great deal of money to ensure that there is a European competitor in the commercial airliner manufacturing business. They can't afford to drop out now, almost regardless of the cost.