Posted on 10/30/2007 6:12:28 AM PDT by WesternCulture
If you got to ask this you may want to reconsider your nickname.
Nevertheless, this is very much a white elephant. The fact that the international carriers preferred the 777, 767, and even their own A340 over the jumbo 747 should have told Airbus something about the market appetite for Ginormous aircraft.
“here’s no such thing as a truly competitive contract from the govt, especially when it comes to the military. I can’t imagine the govt considering buying German planes and Chinese missiles.”
Boeing lost a competition with Lockheed to build the Joint Strike Fighter.
The A320 is Airbus's signature model, and one that I actually don't mind flying. I'll try the A380 when it is delivered to Emirates, but know that it will be a pain in the posterior waiting to board it at JFK.
I have the feeling that soemthing is going to change...
I see a large bridge in your future.
The United States of America is the most advanced technological nation on the planet, period. It is the world technological superpower and it is form the United States where the vast majority of scientific breakthroughs have been coming for the last 60 years. I asked you what did the French make in term of scientific breakthrough in the last 60 years, you answered a lot but you could not name a single one.
For a plane that’s “not selling”... it seems to be selling rather well. The 747-800 has 90 sales, 44 options, 15 additional purchase rights.
I want evidence about subsidies. The poster asserted that Boeing has direct subsidies comparable to those received by Airbus. Do you have evidence about direct federal subsidies to Boeing for development and production of commercial aircraft?
I believe there are export subsidies but these are given as offsets to the VAT rebates that Airbus receives. Other companies also receive these subsidies. I believe that the EU won a WTA case against these subsidies so they have been stopped. If you have knowledge about these export subsidies and other direct subsidies, please elaborate.
The concorde paid off on only two routes - NY / London and NY/Paris.
On 9/11 most of it’s customers literaly died and then so did the concept.
(It had no reach for anything other and couldn’t be used over land because of the noise a plane makes if supersonic)
The Concorde failed because cutting down travel time from 7 to 4 hours doesn’t mean much when you take into account the difference in time zones.
I wonder how al Qaeda views the A320?
In planing further then a year and planning with synergies.
Asian and Middle eastern airlines have already placed orders for the A380 and more would come in once Airbus delivers those initial orders. US airlines are behind the game, years behind other major international airlines, so it would take a while for an American airline to introduce A380 in its routes.
“I completely agree with you that the current status of air travel is a great argument for more high speed trains. Unfortunately, the scale required for effective interstate travel is tremendously expensive. It would require some of those government/business partnerships that we just don’t do well in the US—reference “The Big Dig” in Boston.”
- The Big Dig sure has been a problematic enterprise, but I don’t know if it’s typically American to fail in the department of government/business cooperation. But in any case, I guess you’re right in assuming such a partnership will be necessary if the US is going to get more of high speed trains.
“Also, please don’t use the term “US Americans.” It is a politically motivated term that was calculated to antagonize Americans. At least in my case it works.”
- Okay, I’ll remember that. However, the term “Americans” isn’t really correct, even if it mostly ‘means’ citizens of the USA when people talk about “Americans”.
Would you say “US citizens” is a better expression than “US Americans”?
Still waiting to see what they will do with the A350 program.
and practically all of lockheed’s sales are to govts. So lockheed has a big advantage there.
"Americans" is how we think of ourselves.
OTOH, Mexicans regard themeslves as "Americans" and are somewhat offended by the American presumption that only people in the US are from the Americas...
You can't win this one...
The 747-8 passenger version has only 20 sales to Lufthansa, plus five in Boeing Business Jet configuration. The other 65 are 747-8F freighter versions, which were expected to sell well. The passenger market hasn't embraced the plane - it's apparently waiting to see where fuel costs go and how the 787 works out.
All I know is that when I go to SFO there are 777s everywhere - visually, it looks like the aircraft of choice for trans-Pacific travel.
“I want evidence about subsidies. The poster asserted that Boeing has
direct subsidies comparable to those received by Airbus.”
I’m not a business person, but having just scanned though “Boeing Versus
Airbus”, the impression I get is both companies try to get any advantage
from the governments they deal with...which to my naive ears sounds
like “business as usual”.
One thing I’ll say about the book...given the twists and turns of
Boeing over the past couple of decades, it’s fairly amazing they are
in as good a shape as they are now.
Boeing versus Airbus: The Inside Story of the Greatest
International Competition in Business
by John Newhouse
http://www.amazon.com/Boeing-versus-Airbus-International-Competition/dp/1400078725/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-7855343-0492853?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1193759073&sr=1-1
They will find that it’s a plane.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.