Posted on 06/12/2005 7:51:51 PM PDT by Righty_McRight
Boeing issued a new challenge to its arch-rival Airbus yesterday, saying it expected to regain its status as the world's biggest supplier of airliners by 2008 at the latest.
Alan Mullaly, head of the American group's commercial planes division, delivered a series of damaging blows to its opponent on the eve of the biennial air show at Le Bourget, Paris, which was meant to be a showcase for the European company's A380 super-jumbo.
First, he said Boeing was in talks with another 27 airlines over potentially 427 more orders for its new 787 Dreamliner - raising the prospect of nearly 700 orders for the fuel-efficient, long-range 250-seater jet.
Airbus has so far secured 10 orders for its A350 twin-engined jet compared with 266 for Boeing's 787. It is due to announce 100 more orders this week, although there are now serious doubts about whether the Emirates and Qatar Airlines will go ahead.
The official launch of the A350, the aircraft at the heart of a transatlantic trade dispute, has been postponed until September. It was supposed to have been approved by ministers from Britain, France, Germany and Spain today.
The plane has been hit by growing production difficulties at Airbus's plants, which have already caused a six-month delay in deliveries of the A380 to its first customers. Mr Mullaly rubbed salt in the wound by claiming that airlines had already seen or heard of four versions of the new A350.
Airbus has also been damaged by a long-running Franco-German power struggle at the top of Eads, its main parent, which has cancelled a series of planned events at the show because it has yet to appoint its new co-chief executives.
Boeing, said Mr Mullaly, expected to deliver 375 to 385 planes next year - 100 more than in 2004, when Airbus outsold it for a second consecutive year. The Europeans expect to deliver 360 planes this year compared with Boeing's 320, and substantially more in 2006.
However, Mr Mullaly indicated that his company's deliveries could be higher next year because it had the capability to raise output at its US plants and had already sold 80% of its 2006 production.
This would bring the date of its projected overtaking of Air bus even closer than 2008. "Our plan is to be the preferred leader in the marketplace where we have been for 99% of our history," said Mr Mullaly.
He indicated a further onslaught on Airbus's precarious supremacy with the expected launch of a stretched version of the venerable 747 jumbo, adding 50 extra seats to current capacity of about 400, compared with the basic 555 seats available on the A380. The Boeing board may give the go-ahead for the 747 Advanced later this month after receiving strong interest from airlines, including British Airways, which have been attracted by plans to fit it with the 787's new fuel-efficient, less-noisy engines.
It is also considering plans for replacing the best-selling 737 single-aisle family of planes, making it available in versions ranging from 90 to 210 seats and capturing a further slice of a market where the Airbus alternatives are much older.
Boeing executives, meanwhile, confirmed they were backing moves in the US Congress to ban Eads and its partners from bidding for the lucrative Pentagon contract for air-to-air refuelling tanker aircraft while the dispute over alleged subsidies remains.
The European Union and United States will formally lodge their tit-for-tat legal actions at the World Trade Organisation today.
Mr Mullaly said a negotiated settlement was still possible - if Airbus gave up the use of risk-free, soft loans from European governments to develop new planes.
It will cruise at .98 Mach, so were are not talking about another Concorde. However, it will carry up to 250 passengers at a range between 6,000 and 9,000 nautical miles. Also, it is designed to have landings and takeoffs quieter than Stage 4 airplanes and the same fuel burn as today's best performers.
Yeah, the Sonic Cruiser is the future.
No, it would have if the project had been launched. It won't be revived.
So Basically the SC was just a concept plane, and a PR stunt ?
Dassault developed it....IBM marketed it....hell of a package.,..
You'd have to ask Boeing. After 9/11 there was less interest in a higher speed plane than a more efficient one.
A BWB would be the much more efficient than the A380, and it would be the easiest design to put three engines on if ETOPS restrictions make twins undesirable.
Tant pis, Froggies!
That may be true, but the fact that Airbus exists and sells a lot of planes has made Boeing a better manufacturer and overall company.
Competition is a good thing, it keeps them honest, and that's why Airbus should be allowed to bid for Pentagon projects.
Next time any of your friends whines about the supposed inefficiencies of the competitive marketplace, as multiple suppliers duplicate effort to produce similar products, point out this burst of creativity from Boeing.
Responding to the challenge, Boeing is coming out with two major airframe modifications and one completely new blank-paper innovative airframe simultaneously. Absent competition, this process would have taken a decade longer. The competition has made them more efficient.
That's crazy-talk! What will you want next? To tell the waitress what you would like to eat before she serves you?!? =P
I never said that competition is bad. However, when one competitor can pass-off its cost and hide them through direct subsidies by virtue of being partially state-owned, then you have a problem.
If EADS is going to be allowed to bid for defense contracts, then we should open the process to Sukhoi, Antonov, Mil, Kamov, Mitsubishi, Kawasaki, Embraer, etc so as to provide EADS with more competition in such bids.
Also, imagine operating an aircraft company without direct gifts of resources and material from the state and without the state as a majority share holder and without your R&D costs subsidised without the rate payers' money.
We should look for the best value.
I have no problem opening up the bid process to those who can do it and sustain it.
At the very least, it keeps US contractors more honest.
I know they say that it "takes money to make money"...but that doesn't mean using your OWN money, does it? You're talking crazy, man...
If nothing goes wrong.....
Yes, so long as we are competing we other private enterprises. EADS can hide costs through direct subsidisation and make it appear that, on paper, you are getting a better value. However, if the same product were produced by a completely private enterprise, then the "sticker price" would be more. If we only based our decsions on perceived value as opposed to genuine market value, then we would go shopping for defense contractors from China's state-owned industries (I am certain that they could produce an aircraft for much less perceived cost than EADS).
Lowest cost doesn't mean the most/best value.
The most expensive system can often be the best value.
A Chinese sytem, in my mind, wouldn't be "sustainable" because the chances we'll be at war with them are much higher than we'll be at war with the EU, for instance.
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.