A380 hits turbulence (Bless Those Environmentalists Alert!!)

Times of London | 05/21/04 | Russell Hotten

[SW6906]

IT HAS been five years in the planning and is costing £6.6 billion. But while the makers of the world's largest aircraft concentrated on the big picture, they seem to have overlooked a few minor details.

Not only is Airbus facing delays in delivery of the wings for its A380 super-jumbo jet, there is also fierce opposition to the company making essential changes to one of its factories.

Development of the 555-seat A380 is one of Europe's largest industrial projects, an engineering achievement that involves Airbus producing parts in four countries.

Yesterday, it emerged that the A380 won't even be able to land at its Hamburg factory to be fitted out and painted. A German court has ordered Airbus to stop extending an essential runway at the factory because of opposition from environmentalists and residents. To expand the runway, Airbus must dig into a dyke. Airbus plans to appeal, but given the power of German Greens no one is expecting an early resolution.

However, it would be an achievement for the aircraft to be able to fly to Hamburg at all. The A380's 80-metre wings are being made at Broughton, in North Wales. The plan was to ship them to the Airbus headquarters in Toulouse, France, on a purpose-built ferry. Except that the Environment Agency and the Welsh Assembly have refused the Port of Mostyn permission to dredge the harbour so that the ferry can dock. That would upset the wildlife.

Instead, the wings have to be partially dismantled and shipped on a smaller boat to Toulouse, but even this vessel may not get access to the dock as the harbour continues to silt up.

With the first A380s due for delivery in 2006, there is serious concern about delays in assembling the aircraft and doing the necessary test flights.

An Airbus spokesman in Toulouse said that it was a national holiday in France and referred The Times to Hamburg. At Hamburg they said it was a national holiday and to ring back on Monday.

[CasearianDaoist]

And I do not mean from Aibus's web site. It is unclear how many of those orders are really "firm" besides the Air France, Virgin and the Middle East buys. It is highly unussualy for airlines to make commitments that are legally binding on a new airframe before it is even built.

BTW, before they are done this is going to cost way more that the 6 bill proposed - and that does not include hidden subsidies. The break even cost will be a substantially high number of sales and if you add in the other giveaways to airlines in terms of deals on other planes and possible subsidies to handle airfield and gate modification offered as incentives to buy this plane it will be even higher. This will end up just like the Concorde. By diverting all cash flow to this they will lose market share in the smaller planes and not make a profit off of the 380. Of source the idea was never to make a profit in the first place - this is yet another grandiose caper thought up by the French and is an obsolete notion of prestige. If economies continue down the line they are going in the EU these sort of subsidies programs will not last very long (and please do not tell me that it is not a subsidized program as is all of Airbus.)

I imagine if Bush wins in Nov. we will start to deal with some unfinished business in regard to trade subsidies with the EU, regardless of what we get out of the WTO. This will be one of them.

[Last Dakotan]

FLY BOEING

Millions of Chinese assemblers can't be wrong.

[SW6906]

Can't cite a source right now, the 130+ is just what I remember is what Airbus is officially claiming and everyone in the industry agrees is the total "sold". The airlines for all (I think) of those orders are publicly identified (meaning they admit they have signed up for them).

You know and anyone in the industry knows that airplane deals are very complicated and shrouded in secrecy. Few outside of a very select group know the actual purchase price of an aircraft. An airline does not pay the bulk of the purchase price until the day of delivery. I believe Singapore's deal is a "walk-away" deal in that they can decide up to the day of delivery to not take the airplane and incur no penalty. Wouldn't surprise me if most of these early "purchases" have similar terms just to get people on board such a risky venture. I hope SIA does turn them down at the last minute! ;o)

[UNGN]

"Not a chance. Asian nations are evaluating the 777 or a new extended 747, because they will not be able to afford the operating costs of the A380. The engines will not be efficient enough to save on fuel costs, every participating airline will have to pay for new gates and terminals, and many runways would have to be extended or widened to handle the aircraft. Airbus made a huge mistake."

Not only are the new 380 engines New and Untested in real world service, but 777 engine repair and overhaul costs are plummeting. 777's will be not just a little cheaper than a 747 to operate, but WAYYY cheaper.

Airlines that buy 380's instead of 777's will be very sorry when they are due for their first overhaul. Look for mass parkage at that time.

[USNFighting31st]

Millions of Chinese assemblers? True many of the parts are fabricated in other countries. Sales demand it, as well as it keeps cost down so as to compete with Airbus. It is a fact of life, I don't know how you will avoid it and still sale airplanes. You think Airbus doesn't do the same thing? You think we can sale the airplane for the same cost if it was 100% built in America? How about 100% build by Boeing? Not a chance.
Regardless of where the parts are made, the airplanes still rolls out the U.S. and BOEING is still America's largest exporter and one of the largest employers.

[SW6906]

BTTT, trolling for replies......

[SW6906]

BTTT, trolling for replies......

[cmsgop]

Word is that ALOT of 7E7 Orders are in the Pipeline.

[Tribune7]

OK, here's a bump. I'm kinds curious too.

[jriemer]

I believe that PD's prediction is right on the money.

What this article goes to the heart of is the war of the "producers" vs the "consumers" in Europe. Considering that their socialist economies mandate: 35hr working weeks, artificial apprenticeship requirements and they still have +8% unemployment (and GWB is getting hammered for the US numbers) you would think that Europeans would support any industry that actually produces exports and maybe a profit. It appears that Airbus has more to fear from fellow europeans than Boeing becuase if they cannot get these logistical issues straightened out, there will not be a plane and contracts will be cancelled.

In fact, the "consumers" in Europe have made it so that European companies haven been offshoring work to America for some time.

[Pukin Dog]

Thanks.

People don't realize just how the 777 SIPS gas. Those two monster engines are barely working to keep a 777 at cruise at altitude. Most of the thrust goes into getting up where the air is thin and the 777 wings are most efficient. Once up there, you can just dial it back without losing speed and just go forever. Boeing is going to stretch the 777 too. It is also possible that if Boeing builds the 747X, it will use the 777 engines, but with 4 of them, it will be even more efficient than on the 777.

[Dead Dog]

Yah, they'll need to switch gears fast, or be 5 years late to the 767 replacement party.

[Poohbah]

A German court has ordered Airbus to stop extending an essential runway at the factory because of opposition from environmentalists and residents. To expand the runway, Airbus must dig into a dyke.

I understand the lesbian groups are upset, too.

[Dead Dog]

Not just anybody get's to plow into a dyke.

[Pukin Dog]

This is a 777 engine against the fuselage of a 737.

[Pukin Dog]

The 7E7 has LOTS of orders.

[SW6906]

Actually, the 7E7 has the 50 from ANA, but does it have any others yet?

[SW6906]

Trollin, trollin, trollin......for replies.......

[The_Royal_Navy]

Oh,.. 'Now' I understand the new policy,..

The Bigger the plane, the Bigger we can wright our name down the side of it,.. ;) :D

After all, when your travaling at M:2 i don't supose it's easy to read whos plane it is,....

Easy on the concorde bashing,...

Did u know that America was building one also, and was planed to be 'faster' than concorde.

but after haveing spent just as much as britan and france, all they had was a wooden scale model..

but if america 'HAD' built it's own super sonic passenger fleet, then it would be praised... but becuase America failed to do so, all that was left for people to say is,.. "Oh!, stupid idea"...


But if that realy was the case, and realy 'WAS' a stupid idea, why then did america bother trying to build one of her own in the first place?

Concorde was the future,..
Because if you can't succeed with a super sonic passenge jet,
Then How in the world will the 'Next grate idea witch is "Sub-orbitel flight" , ever stand a chance of becoming a reality.

Concorde was around for a good many years,...

but the 'TWO' main reasons for it's retirement to the history books, is

ONE: 9/11,.., a lot of the people who were on them planes and also in the twin towers were concordes 'Life-Blood',..

And thoughts few rich busness people were either flying on concorde them selfs, and when they wern't, they were paying for others in their company and their friends and family to fly on them also,...

Concorde was for rich busness men, and so called 'rich-kids', and also 'once-in-a-lifetime' users who had saved and saved for there never again experence.

But all theres things start out that way,.. being something for thefew and 'privalidged'...

just like the car was, and the T.V, and it's surly the everything else.

The 'jumbo jet' was origonaly supose to be 'Spacos' and have all the bells and whisesle that ritcherd branston now wants on his proposed new plane's,... But the jumbo was soon filled out with lots and lots of sheat to be geared towards more passanger numbers and grater 'profit'...

so this plan for new 'bigger' plain's is only a re invention of the 'Last big plain'.

and the SECONED reson why concored was decomisiond:

ritchered branston wanted to buy the concorde fleet of BA(British Airways) but they said 'NO'.... ans why did they say NO,...

because there is BAD BLOOD between them,... richerd branston snitced on BA for doing something witch i don't actualy know what it was, but basicly BA got ended up getting there hand slaped for it, and ever since BA and VIRGIN have not realy been 'Friend's'...

just like when they didn't alow Ritcherd Branston to take over the LOTTERY,.. Simply because someone at the top didn't like him, even though he was going to turn the LOTERY in to a 'no-profit' making organisation,...

me thinks the 'NON-PROFIT' part was the reason.
And Me 'also' thinks that it meant 'somebody-somewhere' wasn't going to get there share of the procedings if Ritchered Branston took it over.

[Pukin Dog]

But if that realy was the case, and realy 'WAS' a stupid idea, why then did america bother trying to build one of her own in the first place?

Uh, that is a long rant, only to have so much wrong in it.

I'll only correct a few things.

The US did not spend anywhere near what was spent on Concorde development. The US's wooden mock up was all that was needed for Boeing to understand that no supersonic transport would be profitable within US airspace, and that Boeing would not sell enough units to justify building the aircraft for international travel alone. Boeing was proved correct through the dismal sales figures and profits earned from Concorde.

The Boeing SST was a 4-engine blended-delta wing designed for Mach 2.5 or better. No engines at that time were available that would have provided the combined thrust and fuel efficiency to allow for an acceptable operating cost.

Boeing did NOT fail to build the jet, it correctly decided not to. It was not going to be legal to generate a shock-wave over populated areas, not going to be cheap, not going to be profitable, so NOT going to be produced. All this information was available to Concorde, but it was ignored because they knew they would get government to fill in where profits were missing.

If you really believe the US lacks expertise in this area, ask yourself what Europe was building while the XB-70 and YF-12A were making holes in your airspace in the 60s.