Tinpusher007

I could be wrong, but maybe he means it will be profitable for the operators...whereas you are talking about profits for Airbus from sales.

__________________
"Education is a progressive discovery of ignorance."

forgot to bid

How much better is the 787 over the 777? Couldn't you make a shorter 777 with the same fuel capacity?
...

Question from someone who doesn't pay attention much to either the 787 and 777. I'm still trying to figure out the DC-9 turned MD-88.

Tinpusher007

Boeing studied a shortened version of the 777-200ER but it never saw the light of day. As far as comparing it to the 787, I believe it would be too heavy to be fuel efficient, especially from a CASM perspective with less seats.

__________________
"Education is a progressive discovery of ignorance."

tsquare

Not to mention that it's fugly.. Ewwwwwww

alvrb211

Really? The most complex part of the B787 that wasn't made in Seattle came from England. It was delivered on time and on budget. It also made sfc target. It's called the Rolls Royce Trent 1000 and, unlike the 787, it was ready to fly a very, very long time ago.

Boeing normally uses in excess of 15,000 vendors (as does Airbus). All of a sudden, Boeing want to shift blame out of Seattle to their vendors? This is Boeing's mess! I'm familiar with many of Boeing's vendors. Feel free to correct me and tell me which ones are holding up the Dreamliner. Are you trying to tell me Boeing doesn't know how to manage outsourcing and Foreign Direct Investment?

I don't expect anything. This claim is based on causal model forecasts and comes from Airbus and their current customers. Of course, the fact that approx 2000 new freighters are expected over the next 18 years looks pretty good for the A380 too.

Al

__________________
The BOD don't fool me!

bravo24

I guess all of you armchair experts have forgotten about the problems that surrounded the start of the 747 - many said the airplane was too big and Boeing wouldn't sell enough to get back it's development costs. The engines were a major headache and the ramp in Everett was filled with unflyable airplanes. Boeing came VERY close to going out of business. Forty years after its first flight the 747 is still in production with more than 1400 airplanes delivered. Yes, the 787 has had problems and is late. Mistakes have been made. There will be cancellations - some because of the airplane being late and some because of the economy. But the problems will be worked out, the airplane will fly and it will probably be a commercial success.

You airline guys who want to slam Boeing's management - care to compare your airline's balance sheet and earnings against Boeing's?

BTW - In the interests of full disclosure I am a 30+ year Boeing employee.

Carl Spackler

alvrb211 is at it again. This guys only comes out to defend any attack against outsourcing. Say something bad about outsourcing, here comes alvrb211.

Boeing lost control of the 787 because they couldn't handle the numerous errors from OUTSOURCED VENDORS!! This is simply fact. Fact that only alvrb211 can deny.

Carl

__________________
I'm an airline pilot - so I got that goin for me....which is nice.

Carl Spackler

None of the 747's problems were due to mismanaged outsourcing. Most of the 787's problems ARE from mismanaged outsourcing. If you deny that, then you don't work at Boeing.

Carl

__________________
I'm an airline pilot - so I got that goin for me....which is nice.

RU4692

I highly doubt the A380 will ever be profitable for Airbus.

"Mounting deferrals of A380s are further undermining Airbus’s efforts to achieve profitability for the program, and could push the financial break-even point for the aircraft past 2020.

Although airlines aren’t singling out the A380 for deferrals—Boeing 777s, 787s and other aircraft types are similarly affected—the postponements spell particular trouble for the economics of the mega-transport. Airbus is in a critical period of ramping up production of the A380 to gain efficiencies and make up for the greatly increased development costs that surged by billions as a result of the two-year delay in the program. If those efforts stall due to sagging demand, it will increase the challenge to reach financial viability for the aircraft.

Airbus has ceased providing a break-even number for the aircraft—following the lead of rival Boeing—but cost increases owing to program delays have effectively meant the aircraft maker would have to sell more than 500 of the aircraft to turn a profit. So far, it has 200 firm orders. The original break-even point was around the 250th unit."

A380 Break-Even Point Likely To Slip Further to 2020, page 1

__________________
"If you wish to drown, do not torture yourself with shallow water."

alvrb211

So, a company that's used to doing business with over 15,000 vendors is losing control of............... their vendors?

I defend outsourcing because I know how Oligopolistic industries work. I also understand that without "effectively managed" outsourcing, Boeing is finished!

Same goes for Airbus. Ineffective outsourcing = NO Airbus!

Apparently Boeing and Airbus are aware of this fact. Are you?

BTW, I fully expect the B787 to be a success. Eventually!


Al

__________________
The BOD don't fool me!