National Anthems: Home | Africa | Americas | Asia | Australia&Oceania | Europe | Olympic Anthem |

 
Passports: Home [ Africa ] [ Americas, Australia & Oceania] [ Asia] [ Europe] [ Other documents
Travel:
[Europe] [ Asia ] [ USA-Canada ] [ Latin-America ] [ Africa ] [ Australia ] [ Carabben ] [ Air ] [Cruises ]
Forum
Live chat




Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago Posted on: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 00:08:56 -0400

Lee Witten wrote:
> You seem to be presuming that Airbus can't get commercial loans to fund
> all of its development efforts. Wrong. Boeing's been doing it for
> decades now,

But the US marketplace expects short term return on investment, and building
planes is a long term endeavour.

Between 1982 and 2003, Boeing has started exactly one totally new plane, the
777. Airbus started 3 (320, 330/340 and 380).

Boeing's financing philosophy prevented Boeing from ditching the 737 and
starting from scratch.

And it is only now that Boeing has gotten a huge punch in the face (selling
fewer planes than Airbus) that it has gotten sufficient motivation to force
bankers to lend it money for the 7E7 which will replace the 767 completely,
and the 7E7 is in large part already subsidized bu foreigners to begin with,
because amdrican bankers woudln't take such a risk.

> I do find it interesting how the A350 seems to have changed from the
> initial idea of a A300/B757/B767 replacement into something that looks
> more like a direct competitor to the low end of the B777 line.


You have to understand that Boeing has the 2-5-2 777 aircraft and is replacing
the 2-3-2 767 with a 2-4-2 7E7.

Airbus already has the 2-4-2 fuselage with its 330 and 340 aircraft which
already compete against the 777. So If Airbus does produce a 350, it, like
the 7E7 will steal some of the 777 market.


> I am looking forward to seeing what Airbus does propose for the A350.

No different than a 330 with better engines and more composites and perhaps no
bleed air. Not sure about fancy windows with electronic shades.

264117. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264118. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264120. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264121. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264122. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264123. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264124. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264126. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264127. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264128. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264309. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264317. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264325. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264367. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264371. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264438. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264517. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264518. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago
264542. Re: Legacy airlines should have smashed their unions long ago