Airbus vs. Boeing

Aug 9th, 2007, 02:54 PM
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,328
Airbus vs. Boeing

This is an interesting article about the rivalry between the two... Surprisingly, when we all get the impression that Boeing is taking over the skies, while Airbus is loosing market share, some experts are optimistic about Airbus, ESPECIALLY ITS VERY GRANDIOSE PROJECT OF THE A380...

http://www.cdi.org/program/document.
cfm?DocumentID=4014&StartRow=1&ListRows
=10&appendURL=&Orderby=D.DateLastUpdated&
ProgramID=37&from_page=index.cfm
Mamamia is offline  
Aug 9th, 2007, 03:05 PM
  #2  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
Totally disagree. That author is completely wrong.

Here's why. The A380 is a mostly aluminum aircraft. Its structure is more of less the same as aircrafts of the last 40 year. Just bigger and more efficient engines.

That is obsolete technology. Boeing's 787 and Airbus own 350 will have composite fuselage that's much lighter, and are about 20% more efficient than the aluminum aircrafts like the A380 and Boeing current 777 models.

Since the 787 will enter commercial service middle of next year, it only trails the 380 by less than a year. But with better economics.

The 380 will play some roles, but it will never be "grandiose", and is definitely a financial failure.

Unless crude oil price drops down to $20-30/barrel for extended period, few airlines will be ordering the 380.
rkkwan is offline  
Aug 9th, 2007, 03:49 PM
  #3  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 12,885
B787 - the most succesful launch of a totally new airplane in the aviation history. 684 firm orders with 96 pending plus another 384 units on option and rights.

A380 - at this point it's just pride that has this program still going. Financial disaster in the long run. As of last report A380 has 174 orders, but only 165 firm orders and HAD 27 cargo orders that were ALL cancelled. It is estimated that they will need to sell at least 420 units to break even due to all the delay penalties and the falling dollar (all airplane orders are in US$). The original estimate was 240 units just to break even. Kind of reminds me of the Concord program.

If you were an investor, which one which you chose?

AAFrequentFlyer is offline  
Aug 9th, 2007, 10:16 PM
  #4  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,215
It's the 787 that allows cabin pressure to be 6,000 ft, and the relative humidity to be 10%, right. Big improvement in basic passenger comfort (seat width and pitch aside). Does A380 provide same? Maybe the A380 will instead have a media control box beneath every seat, in every footwell
regards -tom.
cary999 is offline  
Aug 10th, 2007, 04:18 AM
  #5  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
No, the A380 will not have the higher humidity and higher pressure. It will have the same as current airplanes.

Media boxes are things of the past. Newer IFEs are all digital AVOD with no boxes under the seats.
rkkwan is offline  
Aug 10th, 2007, 04:33 AM
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 17,062
The fat lady has sung in the matter of long range widebody aircraft. Airbus' late pursuit of the 787 with the A350 will cause even more grief for EADS investors. The A380 is old news.

The next big money battle will be over the "NGSA" - next generation single-aisle - airplane, the replacement for current A320s and 737s et al. Both Airbus and Boeing claim they're working hard on it, but they better keep an eye out on other potential competitors, especially Embraer and maybe some Japanese or even Chinese players. Boeing is currently selling all the 737s it can produce, and Airbus has its hands full with its widebody travails, so it's not clear if either company's R & D people are paying enough attention to this next, absolutely huge, market. (Don't know how many thousands of 737s or A320s or DC-9s/M8xs are getting elderly, but it's a very big number.)
Gardyloo is online now  
Aug 10th, 2007, 05:15 AM
  #7  
LT
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 371
Agree with the other posters -- this author is way off track.

Airbus may remain competitive in the narrow-body segment, but their wide bodies seem to be more and more falling out of favor with most carriers. The 380 program has been so rife with bugs and delays that it will probably be known as the "Edsel of the skies."
LT is offline  
Aug 10th, 2007, 07:45 AM
  #8  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
Boeing is further along than Airbus in designing the next narrowbody. While they're now concentrating on making the 787-3/8/9 fly, the designs are all done months ago. Now, their design teams can work on the 787-10, which shouldn't be THAT much more work, and the new 737 replacement.

On the other hand, Airbus' main focus will be on the A350XWB. While they're taking orders, then final design and specs are far from complete. So, they won't have as much resource to put in the A320 replacement.

Boeing is also pretty far ahead in technology for using composite material for the fuselage.

And just look at the narrowbodies. The A320 family is extremely well designed and successful. They are way ahead of the 733/4/5 products and capture a big chunk of the market. But since then, they've only made small improvements to the A320 family. Meanwhile, not only has Boeing produced the 736/7/8/9 to match the A318/19/20/21, but they're continuously making significant improvements to overtake them. Like the winglet program, and also the 739ER. The 738 and 739ER are capable to make US transcon, while the 321 cannot and the 320 sometimes have trouble doing.

The A380 not only looks like a financial failure on its own, but it also sucks off resources from the other projects so that Airbus is trailing in technology in most segments of the market.
rkkwan is offline  
Aug 13th, 2007, 09:30 AM
  #9  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 2,121
Airbus is a political agency, whereas Boeing is a private, for-profit corporation. That's why Airbus continually messes things up: its real objective is not to build aircraft or to make money, but to serve the various and often conflicting agendas of politicians and political interest groups.
AnthonyGA is offline  
Aug 13th, 2007, 11:28 AM
  #10  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,328
...Interesting... To me, reading the article, it DID make sense as to the efficiency of one single, large airplane, just as the 747 turned out to be a huge success, even though many doubted it in the beginning...

But I must say you guys make sense too... Can't understand why Airbus would not use composite fuselage for its A380, when the use it for their A350...
Mamamia is offline  
Aug 13th, 2007, 11:46 AM
  #11  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,074
They started designing the A380 quite a few years ago, when composite technology wasn't ready for the fuselage. The size of the A380 fuselage also makes it ultra-difficult.

Anyways, the first plane should have been delivered to airlines starting in 2005. It's 2 years late.

Boeing didn't start designing the 787 years after Airbus started the A380 project. Because the size is smaller, and it's a less complex aircraft, it takes a shorter time then the A380 to get to the market.
rkkwan is offline  
Aug 14th, 2007, 09:26 AM
  #12  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 154
There's also the monster called A 390, which is coming up soon.
earthhopper is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy -

FODOR'S VIDEO

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:25 PM.