Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UPS, last Airbus A380 customer, may cancel
Yahoo ^ | 02/23/2007 | Yahoo News

Posted on 02/23/2007 7:18:21 AM PST by FreeManWhoCan

NEW YORK (Reuters) - United Parcel Service Inc. (NYSE:UPS - news), the last remaining customer for the Airbus A380 superjumbo freighter, said on Friday it reached an agreement for Airbus to push back delivery dates of the planes and left open its option to cancel the order outright. ADVERTISEMENT

UPS, the world's largest package delivery company, has been rethinking its order for 10 A380 freighters since October, when Airbus announced a third delay on the giant plane due to wiring problems, putting it two years behind schedule.

UPS's planes were originally scheduled for delivery between 2009 and 2012. The company did not say what new delivery dates it had agreed upon.

The U.S. company is Airbus' sole customer for the freighter version of the A380. Rival FedEx Corp. (NYSE:FDX - news) canceled an order and International Lease Finance Corp. and airline Emirates (EMAIR.UL) switched freighter orders to the passenger version of the plane.....

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: a380; aerospace; airbus; airline; boeing; errorbus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last
To: Tallguy

Correction: The article probably meant to say only customer for the FREIGHTER version of the A380.

The A380 was aimed at very long haul point-to-point flying between major airports (who would be expected to reinforce runways & taxiways as well as re-build gates to accommodate that beast).

It was a risky gamble regardless of the structure of EADS relative to other more 'normal' companies.


21 posted on 02/23/2007 8:33:19 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: FreeManWhoCan

Y'know, they said the same thing about the 747 when it was built. At the time it was a "bet the company" project and, as I recall, Boeing came close to going out of business for a time. The early 70s phrase used to be: "Will the last person to leave Seattle please turn out the lights." Not to say that the A380 will succeed or fail on the technical merits, but I bet if it actually get produced, customers will start coming out of the woodwork. Also, all this crowing about the A380, kind of reminds me of the "John Gault Line".


22 posted on 02/23/2007 8:36:19 AM PST by rbg81 (1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

I won't say your wrong, but I'd like to add that the thing that hurt Boeing back in the early '70s was the collapse of the SST (Super Sonic Transport). Also, most of Boeing's airliner work prior to the advent of the 747 was subsidized by the USAF, ie. the 707 was developed in parallel with the KC-135.


23 posted on 02/23/2007 8:46:05 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rbg81
You maybe right BUT! I would think that before "customers come out of the woodwork" the problem with terrorist must be solved first, this is the terrorists dream come true, a shoelace of plastics and we are on our way to paradise
24 posted on 02/23/2007 8:55:22 AM PST by jerryem (this is my belief, if you don't like it I have others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lx; All
I thought the wiring problem was with the entertainment system so why is the freighter delayed? Must be stuck between the passenger carrying planes on the line.

My thought, too. So was it really only a wiring error to the inflight entertainment system or a just something for the French to bash the German .

Did anybody know more about the wiring chaos?
25 posted on 02/23/2007 8:59:47 AM PST by MHalblaub ("Easy my friends, when it comes to the point it is only a drawing made by a non believing Dane...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

"most of Boeing's airliner work prior to the advent of the 747 was subsidized by the USAF"

What was the 727 developed in parallel with for the USAF?


26 posted on 02/23/2007 9:00:19 AM PST by LM_Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
...but I'd like to add that the thing that hurt Boeing back in the early '70s was the collapse of the SST (Super Sonic Transport).

And I like to add:
On June 5, 1963, President John F. Kennedy formed the National Supersonic Transport program, which committed the government to subsidizing 75% of the development costs of a commercial airliner to compete with Concorde. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_2707)

27 posted on 02/23/2007 9:06:51 AM PST by MHalblaub ("Easy my friends, when it comes to the point it is only a drawing made by a non believing Dane...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LM_Guy
What was the 727 developed in parallel with for the USAF?

No. I don't think that either the 727 or 737 had a military analog during development (but I don't think either plane preceded the 747 by that many years, either).

Saw a program on the 727 a while back. THAT was one great piece of aerodynamic design for the period. The airlines put a whole lot of requirements on that project that required some innovative design work.

28 posted on 02/23/2007 9:07:04 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: rbg81
"Not to say that the A380 will succeed or fail on the technical merits, but I bet if it actually get produced, customers will start coming out of the woodwork."

The problem with the A380 in the market is that (for example) people don't want to fly from Seattle to New York on a 757, hop on an A380 to fly to Paris, then hop on a 737 to fly on to Venice. They want to fly from Seattle to Venice. The hub-and-spoke market concept has gone away. The market has fragmented to direct flights with smaller airplanes. The A380 is an airplane looking for a market based on a no-longer-existing market model.

IIRC, they only sold a couple in 2005, and they didn't sell a single one in 2006 (or maybe a couple very late in the year). The orders have literally dried up and the cancellations are just getting started.

29 posted on 02/23/2007 9:30:26 AM PST by SW6906 (6 things you can't have too much of: sex, money, firewood, horsepower, guns and ammunition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

Ah, the 727. Aircraft of choice for skydiving hijackers everywhere.


30 posted on 02/23/2007 9:32:57 AM PST by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
So why did FedEx and UPS order these planes? Fred Smith, the benevolent dictator of FedEx, loves aviation. He frequently flies the corporate jet himself and he actually poured $50 million into developing blimp freight in the early '80's. Smith the aviation nut just wanted very badly to see the monster fly. Now that he's had the joy of seeing the flying white elephant actually get off the ground, his dream has been realized. Hence the cancellation.

I always wondered why he never named it (even jokingly) as FredEx.

31 posted on 02/23/2007 9:46:52 AM PST by Centurion2000 (If you're not being shot at, it's not a high stress job.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: MHalblaub
I think it was just wiring in general. The problem seems to have stemmed from the fact that EADS/Airbus used two different versions of the Dassault design software. The specs did not translate too well between the versions.

Boeing uses the same software for the 787, but made damn sure up front, that EVERYBODY in Boeing and subs around the world were using the same version of software - NO EXCEPTIONS. All continuing updates are studied, tested, scheduled & coordinated etc...

Interesting that Boeing uses Frog software and gets it right, and the Frogs use Frog software and get it wrong.

32 posted on 02/23/2007 10:04:12 AM PST by AFreeBird (This space for rent. Inquire within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: FreeManWhoCan

As an aviation buff, and one who gets excited about any advance in Aero & Astro, I can't say anything to fault the plane - it is a massive aircraft and a great feat of engineering that advances the technological field.

That said, its failure is primarily due to the utopian internationalist socialism that spawned it in the first place. Sort of like a feuding couple having a baby to "patch things up", Airbus was conceived to cement the European powers by the necessity of working closely together to handle such intricately complex projects as Aerospace inevitably brings.

But just as socialism fails on the local level - it failed at the international level. No country wanted to be the patsy that puts in more effort than others but receives less in the way of benefits. Airbush may also have ignored brutal market demand data, that might have argued against an 800-passenger plane versus 400-500. But this was not about such lowly things as profits - the A380 was primarily about making a Pan-European STATEMENT. And this is what often happens when people do stupid s--- like that.


33 posted on 02/23/2007 10:08:43 AM PST by guitfiddlist (When the 'Rats break out switchblades, it's no time to invoke Robert's Rules.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeManWhoCan

Socialism loses again, hooda thunkit!


Bye bye ErrorBus


34 posted on 02/23/2007 10:15:47 AM PST by editor-surveyor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
If you're consolidating into a single aircraft, that means all those time sensitive packages have to camp out in the cavernous A380 until the last outbound package arrives at the ramp. Only then can the Big Plane fly on to the sorting center, be it Memphis or Louisville or wherever.

I understand that wake turbulance means that Air Traffic Control would have to grant a larger separation distance for the A380 -- something on the order of 50% more than any other 'heavy' IIRC. That wouldn't be too helpful to FEDEX either.

35 posted on 02/23/2007 10:20:47 AM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AU72
"How did they ever get the Chunnell finished?"

They dug from west to east?

36 posted on 02/23/2007 10:28:37 AM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lx
You have your upcoming aircraft mixed up.

Dreamliner dumped wireless entertainment system, 380 just couldn't get the wiring harness' right. Any 380 flying today or in assembly is probably custom wired - no two alike.

37 posted on 02/23/2007 10:33:04 AM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
"In fact, many independent analysts argue that the 787 Dreamliner has in fact received MORE subsidies than the A380."

In your continental dreams.

38 posted on 02/23/2007 10:34:23 AM PST by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: norton

Oddly enough, they dug from both ends and met in the middle. Right on target too. Must have been a mostly British operation.


39 posted on 02/23/2007 10:34:47 AM PST by AFreeBird (This space for rent. Inquire within)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: norton
In your continental dreams.

Really? Have you any concept of the production subsidies provided by the State of Washington? How about the Export-Import Bank? I'm not sure that Boeing's subsidies exceed those of Airbus (others have made that claim) but they nevertheless amount to many billions of dollars per year.

40 posted on 02/23/2007 10:38:07 AM PST by Alter Kaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-63 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson