Re: What are Boeing's plans?

[Pooh Bear]

Jarg wrote:

> "G Farris" > wrote in message
> ...
> > In article <EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51>, says...
> >>
> >>They thought that the passenger travel would be ALL SST. At the time
> >>that the SST took over, the 747s would be converted for cargo use. The
> >>747 nose was designed to hinge up to provide fast and easy cargo loading.
> >>
> >>Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double decker.
> >>Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's hope
> >>that Boeing made the right decision.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Why should we hope that??
> >
> > G Faris
>
> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates into
> more jobs and more money for Americans!

*We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.


Graham

[Jarg]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
> Jarg wrote:
>
>> "G Farris" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article <EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51>,
>> > says...
>> >>
>> >>They thought that the passenger travel would be ALL SST. At the time
>> >>that the SST took over, the 747s would be converted for cargo use. The
>> >>747 nose was designed to hinge up to provide fast and easy cargo
>> >>loading.
>> >>
>> >>Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double decker.
>> >>Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's hope
>> >>that Boeing made the right decision.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Why should we hope that??
>> >
>> > G Faris
>>
>> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates into
>> more jobs and more money for Americans!
>
> *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.
>
>
> Graham
>
>

Really? So Airbus' success is a good thing for the Irish?

Jarg

[Kevin Brooks]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
> Jarg wrote:
>
>> "G Farris" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article <EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51>,
>> > says...
>> >>
>> >>They thought that the passenger travel would be ALL SST. At the time
>> >>that the SST took over, the 747s would be converted for cargo use. The
>> >>747 nose was designed to hinge up to provide fast and easy cargo
>> >>loading.
>> >>
>> >>Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double decker.
>> >>Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's hope
>> >>that Boeing made the right decision.
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > Why should we hope that??
>> >
>> > G Faris
>>
>> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates into
>> more jobs and more money for Americans!
>
> *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.

Trouble seeing past your nose, eh? Forest getting in the way of the trees?
The folks at Smith's Aerospace (which last I heard was still a European
based firm) might like to see the 7E7 succeed, as they are providing a
couple of major systems for it. Likewise Rolls Royce would not mind
continuing to sell engines for it. Some ten nations have companies
contributing to the 7E7 work right now.

Brooks

>
>
> Graham
>
>

[Pooh Bear]

Jarg wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Jarg wrote:
> >
> >> "G Farris" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > In article <EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51>,
> >> > says...
> >> >>
> >> >>Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double decker.
> >> >>Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's hope
> >> >>that Boeing made the right decision.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Why should we hope that??
> >> >
> >>
> >> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates into
> >> more jobs and more money for Americans!
> >
> > *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.
> >
> > Graham
> >
>
> Really? So Airbus' success is a good thing for the Irish?

Not sure if Shorts ( Belfast ) get a look in on Airbus contracts. I know of no
Aerospace manufacturing in the Republic.

Why are you so fixated about the Irish specifically ?


Graham

[Pooh Bear]

Kevin Brooks wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Jarg wrote:
> >
> >> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates into
> >> more jobs and more money for Americans!
> >
> > *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.
>
> Trouble seeing past your nose, eh? Forest getting in the way of the trees?

Nope.


> The folks at Smith's Aerospace (which last I heard was still a European
> based firm) might like to see the 7E7 succeed, as they are providing a
> couple of major systems for it.

If it doesn't succeed I'm sure they'll pick up business elsewhere. They're an
avionics supplier, their product isn't tied to a single airframe.


> Likewise Rolls Royce would not mind continuing to sell engines for it.

Rolls Royce are probably rather more interested in the Trent 900 sales that'll
come from the A380 ( 4 per a/c too ! ) right now - and they're firm orders !
They are the launch engine provider after all.


> Some ten nations have companies contributing to the 7E7 work right now.

But not making.


Graham

[Jarg]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Jarg wrote:
>
>> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Jarg wrote:
>> >
>> >> "G Farris" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > In article <EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51>,
>> >> > says...
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double
>> >> >>decker.
>> >> >>Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's
>> >> >>hope
>> >> >>that Boeing made the right decision.
>> >> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > Why should we hope that??
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates
>> >> into
>> >> more jobs and more money for Americans!
>> >
>> > *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.
>> >
>> > Graham
>> >
>>
>> Really? So Airbus' success is a good thing for the Irish?
>
> Not sure if Shorts ( Belfast ) get a look in on Airbus contracts. I know
> of no
> Aerospace manufacturing in the Republic.
>
> Why are you so fixated about the Irish specifically ?
>
>
> Graham
>

Is Ireland not part of Europe?

Jarg

[Pooh Bear]

Jarg wrote:

> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > Jarg wrote:
> >
> >> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > Jarg wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "G Farris" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > In article <EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51>,
> >> >> > says...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double
> >> >> >>decker.
> >> >> >>Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's
> >> >> >>hope
> >> >> >>that Boeing made the right decision.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Why should we hope that??
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates
> >> >> into
> >> >> more jobs and more money for Americans!
> >> >
> >> > *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.
> >> >
> >> > Graham
> >> >
> >>
> >> Really? So Airbus' success is a good thing for the Irish?
> >
> > Not sure if Shorts ( Belfast ) get a look in on Airbus contracts. I know
> > of no
> > Aerospace manufacturing in the Republic.
> >
> > Why are you so fixated about the Irish specifically ?
> >
> >
> > Graham
>
>
> Is Ireland not part of Europe?
>
> Jarg

Sure - and so is Lichtenstein.

Your point is ?

The major players/partners in Airbus are French, German, Spanish and British.
There are obviously 'spinoff' contracts elsewhere.

Sorry if Ireland, the Czech Republic, Denmark or whoever aren't specifically
involved. The benefit to the the EU is real nonetheless.

Graahm

[Ian Craig]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Jarg wrote:
>
> > "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Jarg wrote:
> > >
> > >> "G Farris" > wrote in message
> > >> ...
> > >> > In article <EdD2d.65358$D%.13394@attbi_s51>,
> > >> > says...
> > >> >>
> > >> >>Now, Airbus is comming out with the 380, a full length double
decker.
> > >> >>Boeing decided not to extend its 747 top the full length. Let's
hope
> > >> >>that Boeing made the right decision.
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> > Why should we hope that??
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates
into
> > >> more jobs and more money for Americans!
> > >
> > > *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.
> > >
> > > Graham
> > >
> >
> > Really? So Airbus' success is a good thing for the Irish?
>
> Not sure if Shorts ( Belfast ) get a look in on Airbus contracts. I know
of no
> Aerospace manufacturing in the Republic.
>
Am pretty sure that Shorts don't have any Airbus contracts - think they
worked pretty much exclusively on Bombardier and Boeing.

Besides, Shorts (Belfast) is in Northern Ireland so British.....(running to
avoid the obvious politcal bomb here)

[Kevin Brooks]

"Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
...
> Kevin Brooks wrote:
>
>> "Pooh Bear" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > Jarg wrote:
>> >
>> >> Because we like American companies to be successful as it translates
>> >> into
>> >> more jobs and more money for Americans!
>> >
>> > *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same reason.
>>
>> Trouble seeing past your nose, eh? Forest getting in the way of the
>> trees?
>
> Nope.
>
>
>> The folks at Smith's Aerospace (which last I heard was still a European
>> based firm) might like to see the 7E7 succeed, as they are providing a
>> couple of major systems for it.
>
> If it doesn't succeed I'm sure they'll pick up business elsewhere. They're
> an
> avionics supplier, their product isn't tied to a single airframe.

Pretty poor business view, IMO. "Ahhh, forget about bothering over those
sales--surely we can sell it elsewhere"?

>
>
>> Likewise Rolls Royce would not mind continuing to sell engines for it.
>
> Rolls Royce are probably rather more interested in the Trent 900 sales
> that'll
> come from the A380 ( 4 per a/c too ! ) right now - and they're firm orders
> !

7E7 has firm orders too--you keep forgetting that, don't you? Or do you just
have a serious reading comprehension problem?

> They are the launch engine provider after all.
>
>
>> Some ten nations have companies contributing to the 7E7 work right now.
>
> But not making.

Ahhh! So companies should consider future business as irrelevant, eh? Maiden
flight is scheduled for 2007--not that far off, now is it? One can only
assume with the business sense you have demonstrated thus far, that you are
not employed in any kind of key business decisionmaking role.

Brooks

>
>
> Graham
>
>

[G Farris]

I happen to subscribe to the believe that the best player(s) should win.
Boeing has been trailing Airbus for some years now, both in technological
development and in marketing strategy. Condit has paid the price, which I'm
sure came as a surprise to no one here, and the company is logically paying
the price in market share.

There is room for both, of course, and there is a serious issue regarding
subsidies. If you listen to Boeing execs, they'll tell you you don't
contribute anything to the 7E7 program until you actually fly in one, whereas
the A380 will cost a lot to the European taxpayers, even if they never fly,
and particularly if it's not successful. The truth, as usual, is a bit more
shades of grey, as both companies have received and will continue to receive
considerable subsidies - but Boeing has a point nevertheless. No one will ask
the European citizens their opinion before bailing out Airbus, should the A380
fail to meet expectations. In fact, they will never even be told the full
amount of the subsidy they're to hit up for.

You have to give Airbus some credit - not only for coming up to parity market
share with Boeing in so few years, but also for forging ahead with a real
market strategy. "We're tired of being shut out of long haul markets,because
we have no answer to the 747, so we're going to out-jumbo the jumbo!" Time
will tell if it's a good move or not, but it's at least a readable strategy,
while Boeing has been flirting around for years with different flavored
fantasies, before finally settling on what looks like a typical medium-haul
airliner with a curvy paint scheme.

It looks like the competition is good for the airlines and the travelling
public, but very risky business for manufacturers.

G Faris

[Paul Sengupta]

"G Farris" > wrote in message
...
> It looks like the competition is good for the airlines and the travelling
> public, but very risky business for manufacturers.

Mmm. Competition. How much competition is there if Airbus
make the only real choice in the 500+ seat market and Boeing
make the only real choice in the 200-300 seat market? :-)

Paul

[Thomas Borchert]

Paul,

> and Boeing
> make the only real choice in the 200-300 seat market
>

that's a big if, if ever I saw one.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Fritz]

>> *We* like European companies to be succesful for much the same
reason.
>>
> Really? So Airbus' success is a good thing for the Irish?

I'm afraid the only real risk is to have one company alone. Monopoly's
nevera good solution.

--
Fritz