I think Boeing is going to poop itself (Airbus buys 51% of C Series Production)

Bear said:
speculation
or your insider information!!
Click to expand...
I think @Bear has found his happy place, now he can formulate an evil conspiracy theory and expose how Trump is responsible to the rest of the internet. I will continue to observe this behavior, for science.
 
This was a masterful move on Airbus's part. They make Boeing's management look woefully incompetent in comparison yet again and I'm excited to see more jobs in the US, especially in a great city like Mobile.
 
And at 51000' the Gulfstream pilots look down and say "I'm going to quit and go do that.". It's all nonsense. "Get a job. Go to your job. Do your job. Go home.". That's some advice that my dad passed down to me, it was given to him from someone he respected, and while it seems blindingly simple, it really is that simple.
 
This is a great example of market regulation failure. You can try to regulate whatever you'd like, but the market will usually find a way to equilibrium.


Also: I'm a huge Boeing fan. I'm 3rd generation Boeing, and most of my immediate and extended family has worked for them. I so wish they would get off their ass and do something. The 787 was good, but Mad Max isn't going to be able to compete with the 1-2 punch that Airbus will have with the C-Series/NEO.
 
pete2800 said:
This is a great example of market regulation failure. You can try to regulate whatever you'd like, but the market will usually find a way to equilibrium.
Click to expand...

This is the way globalization should work, if you want access to a market you should pay taxes in that market and make an investment in that market. I don't care who owns the company as long as they're using American labor and would happily buy a Toyota or Honda if it had enough US content in it which many of their cars and trucks do.
 
Cptnchia said:
No, Boeing didn’t see this coming.
Click to expand...

Tough to say definitively, but it sure looks that way. Hard to fathom that someone, somewhere in SEA or CHI didn't contemplate this, but proceeding with the lawsuit seems to affirm they either truly didn't consider it, or they simply accepted that this was a risk and still thought it wise to proceed.

I still expect Boeing to fight this and try to make it painful, but since Airbus has played the American jobs card with the MOB assembly site, the argument appears to be on thin(ner) ice.

mastermags said:
I mean, hasn't Boeing's business model the last 30 years been 'attack fledging competitor, stretch current product, await Airbus to fail?'
Click to expand...

bimmerphile said:
you forgot "scrap tooling to successful airframe because reasons"
Click to expand...

gotWXdagain said:
This is what happens when you stop innovating.
Click to expand...

I get what you guys are saying here, and don't necessarily disagree, but I think it's a lot more complex than simple innovation. For starters, Boeing, Airbus, and Embraer have all been playing the incremental-upgrade game vs. clean-sheet innovation game. Bombardier rolled the dice with a full clean-sheet design and that clearly did not pan out, for many reasons, which is how we got here. The 787 program for Boeing still hangs in the balance - some still doubt Boeing's ability to recoup the $30B deferred production costs in the existing accounting block, let alone recoup the full amount at all. While that cash has long since been spent, if you did a post-mortem on the business case, it may show that the program never generated a sufficient return relative to it's risk profile.

As for the 757 - I love the look of it as much as anybody else, but it's really not without it's own issues. Very few 757 departures utilize the transatlantic range, and even fewer use the superior takeoff performance, which means it's woefully overbuilt for the capacity/range it offers. This is why you see Delta, United, and American replacing them with 737-900ER's and A321's. A 757neo would not have fixed this either - the existing current-generation gap would simply translate to the next-generation aircraft. With the benefit of hindsight, Boeing probably missed the mark by not offering enough range or payload on the existing 757 design. The wing and engines have considerable room for growth in Max Takeoff Weight to either add a lot more gas to go farther, or to stretch it even further (woof). By not utilizing either, it's simply an overbuilt machine that gets killed inside the range of 739's and A321's.
 
A Life Aloft said:
This is the exact same link and story that Doug already posted on page one. Can you not read or are you just that desperate to keep posting more cut and paste drivel. Jesus.

panda-at-work-o.gif
Click to expand...

Is reading required here? I mean, there are more pictures here than the other pilot forums, it is why I'm here. Aye kant reed so guud. There is an entire section dedicated to pictures.

Back to the original topic: A foreign manufacturer is going to employ Americans in the south to build a Canadian-European product to be used domestically and will also be exported to markets around the world? What is that bumper sticker going to look like "Be American build Canadian!"

I feel like I've seen this before. Reims Skyhawks, Martin Canberra, Fuji UH-1, etc...


Sent from my Startac using Tapatalk.
 
Ecl!pse said:
Tough to say definitively, but it sure looks that way. Hard to fathom that someone, somewhere in SEA or CHI didn't contemplate this, but proceeding with the lawsuit seems to affirm they either truly didn't consider it, or they simply accepted that this was a risk and still thought it wise to proceed.

I still expect Boeing to fight this and try to make it painful, but since Airbus has played the American jobs card with the MOB assembly site, the argument appears to be on thin(ner) ice.







I get what you guys are saying here, and don't necessarily disagree, but I think it's a lot more complex than simple innovation. For starters, Boeing, Airbus, and Embraer have all been playing the incremental-upgrade game vs. clean-sheet innovation game. Bombardier rolled the dice with a full clean-sheet design and that clearly did not pan out, for many reasons, which is how we got here. The 787 program for Boeing still hangs in the balance - some still doubt Boeing's ability to recoup the $30B deferred production costs in the existing accounting block, let alone recoup the full amount at all. While that cash has long since been spent, if you did a post-mortem on the business case, it may show that the program never generated a sufficient return relative to it's risk profile.

As for the 757 - I love the look of it as much as anybody else, but it's really not without it's own issues. Very few 757 departures utilize the transatlantic range, and even fewer use the superior takeoff performance, which means it's woefully overbuilt for the capacity/range it offers. This is why you see Delta, United, and American replacing them with 737-900ER's and A321's. A 757neo would not have fixed this either - the existing current-generation gap would simply translate to the next-generation aircraft. With the benefit of hindsight, Boeing probably missed the mark by not offering enough range or payload on the existing 757 design. The wing and engines have considerable room for growth in Max Takeoff Weight to either add a lot more gas to go farther, or to stretch it even further (woof). By not utilizing either, it's simply an overbuilt machine that gets killed inside the range of 739's and A321's.
Click to expand...
Actually Delta is pulling 757s out of the desert and acquired 6? from Shanghai Airlines because the 73 hasn't been performing. Yes 737s and 321s are coming but they are being used on the east coast/FL mainly and the 73 as mentioned is being pulled out of Hawaii because it's performance sucks and it can't do the job reliably.
 
ClarkGriswold said:
Actually Delta is pulling 757s out of the desert and acquired 6? from Shanghai Airlines because the 73 hasn't been performing. Yes 737s and 321s are coming but they are being used on the east coast/FL mainly and the 73 as mentioned is being pulled out of Hawaii because it's performance sucks and it can't do the job reliably.
Click to expand...

No argument from me on the takeoff performance of the 739/A321 vs the 757, you are absolutely right - they are dogs compared to the 752 and Hawaii is a good example of that. Don't get me wrong, the 757 can still make sense at the right price - which I'm sure Delta got - but that's a function of dwindling popularity across the world.

I would still argue that these performance-required ops are a small percentage of total 757 ops. The majority of 757 ops that do not require the performance are then replaced by the 739/A321. I think the next-generation narrowbodies should help alleviate some of these takeoff performance issues, and for the fewer missions that still require the performance, carriers will need to take a look at either the smaller variants like -700's/A319's, or upgauging to widebodies.

I'd also net some, or all, of the gains out of the desert / Shanghai against the 11-aircraft deal with the NBA ;)
 
As nice as the C Series is, there is still a lack of orders for it. Bombardier had to resort to 75% discounts which still only yielded a fairly small order. Maybe more will come later but for now it looks like a pretty big flop.
 
wheelsup said:
As nice as the C Series is, there is still a lack of orders for it. Bombardier had to resort to 75% discounts which still only yielded a fairly small order. Maybe more will come later but for now it looks like a pretty big flop.
Click to expand...
Are they truly a candidate to replace RJs at the mainline level?
 
wheelsup said:
As nice as the C Series is, there is still a lack of orders for it. Bombardier had to resort to 75% discounts which still only yielded a fairly small order. Maybe more will come later but for now it looks like a pretty big flop.
Click to expand...

With Airbus's backing they'll sell a ton. There was a lot of uncertainty regarding the C Series, but with such a massive company standing behind it has to make a potential customer much more at ease. It'll be interesting to see if they stretch the C-Series to compete in the same market as the A320 NEO at all.
 
Airbus just purchased an aircraft program that can be stretched to the size of an A320, with modern innovations and efficiency, for zero dollars.

My guess is that Airbus will use this airframe as their next short/medium range product, and they'll produce the A321LR until they can find a way to make a clean sheet 757 replacement.
 
Der_Meister said:
Airbus moves more jobs to the US, meanwhile Boeing is opening up a 737 production line in China....
Click to expand...

I know, what is up with that?

Like I caught some crap when I bought a BMW X5 several years ago and some yokel said, "Too good for a Murkin' made SUV?" which is probably built in Mexico or Canada whereas the BMW was built in South Carolina.

Note: Do not purchase a South Carolina assembled BMW.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top