Search the archive:
YaBB - Yet another Bulletin Board
 
   
 
Poll Poll
Question: Who will lead the world market for superplanes?



« Created by: Jake Derrick on: Jun 1st, 2003 at 2:23pm »

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Airbus vs Boeing? (Read 1676 times)
Reply #15 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 12:25am

Oz   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 896
*****
 
Quote:
Airbus is throwing away a pile of money on the white whale...it doesn't fit into airports! Add to that the fact that airports can't handle that many pax at one time.

Aviation authorites are also working on using new technologies to alleviate much of the crowding problems on the jetways.

One more thing to consider...the race to see who can hijack an A380 first! Biggest plane, biggest headline!

Boeing will also make a splash with the BC-17 if they get some orders. 


Yes, if Airbus wastes too much money on that 'white whale' they're goin nowhere. But there is a way to fit these mammoth crafts into airports; folding wings. These were to be supposed to be incorporated in the upgraded 777 series but i dont know if Boeing indeed did this. And with regards to your hijack remark i think that is not a proper and fair statement. Any crazy hijacker can hijack a 747 and wreak havoc. It can happen in any aircraft and yes it would be horrible if it happened to an A380 but thats not Airbus's fault. Its up to the airlines and airport guards to make sure that doesnt happen.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #16 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 12:29am

Ronnie   Offline
Colonel
December 17, 1903. The
reason for FS.
Texas, USA

Gender: male
Posts: 620
*****
 
Well, when the 747 was introduced back in the sixties, none of he airports could accomodate it. But they somehow made room. I'm sure the same will apply for the A-380
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #17 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 3:49am

SilverFox441   Offline
Colonel
Now What?
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada

Gender: male
Posts: 1467
*****
 
In todays marketplace in is only prudent to consider if the new plane may draw the attention of the less scrupulous crowd...and niave to assume it won't.

Folding wings...on a commercial airliner? Possible, and had been considered...but imagine the regulatory nightmare in getting the type certificate.

As for the issue of aiports not being able to handle the 747...not true that there were no aiports to handle it. CYYZ (Toronto International) made only minor changes to allow better service to the new type. A lengthened section of hardened runway for instance. It didn't need to be done, but it was better if done. Only one runway was done initially, the other waited until volume made it worthwhile. Several airports in major centres could handle the 747...but some adjustments were required.

The A380 isn't the same. There is no airport that is capable of dual level or front/rear pax operations as required to load/unload the A380. Some airports stated (when faced with the same question about the super-747) that they were not interested. Terminal infrastructure wasn't capable of handling the extra load so why make room for the plane?

Some transport pundits opined that the super-747 would be used in a "Super-Hub/Feeder" arrangement wherby only a very few, select centres would be serviced. All other centres would be fed from transfer flights. Studies showed that this would actually increase the number of flights through these centres. Concern was also raised that passengers would find faster service if they flew a smaller widebody type direct to destination, bypassing the Super-Hub.

The A380 faces all the same challenges as the Super-747...but in a market tainted by such things as 9/11 and SARS.

You have to admit that Airbus has a big set of brass ones. Smiley It wasn't that long ago that industry analysts stated that the biggest way Airbus could damage Boeing was by going out of business! The increased demand for Boeing products could have resulted in massive outlays of capital while Boeing expanded. Boeing would have been, or very near, over-extended.
 

Steve (Silver Fox) Daly
&&
IP Logged
 
Reply #18 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 4:12am

Craig.   Offline
Colonel
Birmingham

Gender: male
Posts: 18590
*****
 
the 7E7 is a new design if you read all the info they are releasing on it, it is meant to be a completely new plane. the A380 has at least one place it'll do well, Fed-ex as a cargo plane, the super hub in memphis would only need a few minor adjustments to accomadate it. i dont see 4 engines as the way to go these days and airbus seem to base their whole marketing strategy on it. with twins becoming more and more powerful and reliable all 4 engines does is push up the cost of maintenance, with the latest 777 recently takeing off with the heaviest ever load for a twin which was only a few thousand pounds short of a 4 engine plane airbus have to ask themselves where to go next.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #19 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 8:42am

Mr. Bones   Offline
Colonel

Posts: 4304
*****
 
i'll go for Boeing. Airbus is waisting too much money on their A380. the market is too small to get the investment back.

when you look to the mid range AC's, i think Boeing will remain the leader. their 777 series is pleased by a lot of airlines and passengers as well as the old but still good 747 series.
the nm cost is much cheaper than lets say an A340...and for airlines that's the most important thing.

i don't want to say Airbus planes aren't good. i'm glad that Airbus Industries exist! imagine yourself aviation with only one big passenger jet constructor! we would still be flying around with the 707...of course with upgrades (707-900  Roll Eyes )
 

Raw power...the J-58.&&...&&&&My Anet collection.&&
IP Logged
 
Reply #20 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 12:31pm

C   Offline
Colonel
Earth

Posts: 13144
*****
 
Airbus does have a slight advantage in that the A380 is being built...

With regards to terminal facilities - building new two tier gates is probably one of the lesser problems, especially as many airports are looking at expanding.

Secondly, I don't think there's really a problem with wingspan clearance issues - most airports will not initially be able to take the A380 due to taxiway issues (turning etc). this is why at first only one runway at Heathrow will be used (09R/27L I believe).

Anyway, i think Airbus would do even better if they dropped the A400M - please, please let the RAF the buy their leased C-17s (and a few more). It would make life so much easier...

Cheers

Charlie
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #21 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 1:13pm

Oz   Offline
Colonel

Gender: male
Posts: 896
*****
 
Quote:
The A380 isn't the same. There is no airport that is capable of dual level or front/rear pax operations as required to load/unload the A380. Some airports stated (when faced with the same question about the super-747) that they were not interested. Terminal infrastructure wasn't capable of handling the extra load so why make room for the plane?  


This will not be a problem since the jet bridge will connect to the bottom deck only (747..??) The A380 will be allowed only at airports that can accomodate it and that are willing to change some features. I think Airbus is aware of that though. Now the A-380 might not revolutionize anything but think about it. I heard some airlines were planning on constructing dormatories, lounge, etc., on the second deck of the plane. The A-380 will undoubtably be used only on transpacific-transatlantic flights where passengers want to feel confortable on a long journey. I mean honestly, how many people can say they were not impressed by the 747 and havent wanted to get a ticket to get on one. Although the A380 is basically a 747 with another deck, hat amuses passengers....and thats the golden opportunity. We here may not think its such a radical idea, but people will care only about what it offers them on their trip-- just because its something new and has not been done before. The only problem Airbus faces on its A380 is the emergency exits. They are having problems placing them in the right place since the aircraft is so large.
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #22 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 1:21pm
ATI_9700pro   Ex Member

 
I don't really know,there are advantages and disadvantages for everyone.
I want McDonnell-Douglas  back!
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #23 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 3:07pm

Rivers   Offline
Colonel
As Real As It Gets
São Paulo Brazil

Gender: male
Posts: 513
*****
 
I go Airbus, everybody says that the A380 is to big for the airports it’s a waste of money, even Boeing is saying that if I’m not wrong.
My point is this speech is not new the same was used when Boeing was developing the 747, and what happened next the airports were adapted to it, it is in production until today and Boeing is constantly updating the project. Boeing is the company that is today because of its pioneer spirit when they risked everything on the 707 and afterwards in the 747. Now they seem to be lost without their pioneer spirit. Personally I rather Boeing airplanes but we must not close our eyes in front of the evidences if Boeing doesn’t change their currently strategy they’ll have trouble in a near future.
Airports modifications needed for the A380 shouldn’t be a issue the Aeronautic technology can’t be ruled by the airports, if you never adapt them we would still have airplanes that are able to operate in grass fields.
 

...
IP Logged
 
Reply #24 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 3:14pm

Craig.   Offline
Colonel
Birmingham

Gender: male
Posts: 18590
*****
 
i have heard the least it will cost an airport in upgrades is $1million but prob much more in most cases. which for places like heathrow cant be a bad thing
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #25 - Jun 2nd, 2003 at 8:03pm

Deputy   Offline
Colonel
Hillsboro, Oregon

Gender: male
Posts: 2090
*****
 
Suppose y'all didn't happen to know something about airbus. They are making something else right now - other than the 380 - I will give more info after the press briefing.
 

Bad boys, bad boys, whatcha gonna do? Whatcha gonna do when I come for you?&&&&Iustita Omnibus&&Justice for All&&&&Women are: attractive, single, mentally stable. Pick two.&&... &&Yes, we drive on the right-hand-side of the road. Yes, I parked on the left-hand-side of the road. Yes, I blocked traffic for a picture. &&&&&&
IP Logged
 
Reply #26 - Jun 3rd, 2003 at 4:03am

Craig.   Offline
Colonel
Birmingham

Gender: male
Posts: 18590
*****
 
the only other thing i have heard about is the A-400M, with the wings being built in filton
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #27 - Jun 3rd, 2003 at 6:36am

ozzy72   Offline
Global Moderator
Pretty scary huh?
Madsville

Gender: male
Posts: 37122
*****
 
Hmm, I think Airbus will probably have the lions share of the market, its an international conglomerate, and therefore has immense resources and depth, but I think anyone who thinks Boeing are going out of business is kidding themselves. They are just too well established and powerful to be counted out. I think their main strength will lie in the domestic market from now on though... Americans being proud of things with Made In America stamped on them, e.g. Harley Davidson, Levi, Corvette etc etc, and that is no bad thing either.
Personally I wish I had a Boeing Stearman at home, but I doubt I'll be able to afford one on my current wages Cry

Ozzy Smiley
 

...
There are two types of aeroplane, Spitfires and everything else that wishes it was a Spitfire!
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print