A380 to be certified by Dec 13th

The text says different.

The text isnt the issue,there ORDERS and delivery page (downloadable) is updated regularly . I view those changes almost every week and airbus does regularly update with new orders. Their order totals are also up to date as of now . I think you are going to the A350 section or the XWB section instead of going to the ORDERS and DELIVERIES section where you have to download a sheet. Even if we believe that there is a clerical error and those orders have to be cancelled (FIRM ORDERS STANS AT 69 for the A350-800 and 31 for the A350-900) , Airbus then would have to show 100 cancellations into their order books for this year (which hasnt happened) , there would be media reports about airlines cancelling (which hasnt been the case) . The only media reports that have surfaced have been those of Airbus needing about 800 million-1billion so that it can retain those 100 aircrafts on contract because those airlines paid the price of a cheaper (4 billion developmental) aircraft and are now getting something different (12 billion developmental aircraft) .

Airbus Orders and delivery –

http://www.airbus.com/odxml/orders_and_deliveries.xls

And this

Penalty payments to airlines that ordered a now-abandoned, less ambitious version of the A350 could reach up to €800 million (US$1 billion) in the last quarter of the year, Ring said.

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/11/08/business/EU_FIN_EARNS_France_EADS.php

Download the sheet , it specifically says ORDERS on the ORDERS section , DELIVERIES on the DELIVERY section etc etc , Both boeing and airbus list orders and deliveries while airbus doesnt list cancellatioins till year end while boeing updates cancellations every week .

The text says different. I believe in that. But from my experience the Airbus homepage sometimes doesn’t keep pace with the quick direction changes. They have to update the CEO so often, no ressources left to update the A350 homepage.

Nice that you read the quarterly reports of Boeing company well

As a shareholder I do my homework , and recently I’ve been served very well . I have also posted EADS figures just incase you didnt notice 😉

While at the moment they are well off with F-orders and can work the market until they find one to order the Pax-version.

but it seems that you got my point now

I have been saying this all along (regarding boeing having time on there side) , You can look at my views on the I over here and at a.net.

What will the orders be when the program is not launched?

You mean relaunched? The Mk1 was launched,airbus did sell it and buyers bought it.

So when Airbus promises to be better on the A350 then originally planned there is no need to cancel promising slots.

Unless someone wants early deliveries (3 years early) and also wants a more 787-8 type aircraft (which the Mk1 was) and not a bigger aircraft.

Airbus homepage talks of commitments only.

Download the sheet , it specifically says ORDERS on the ORDERS section , DELIVERIES on the DELIVERY section etc etc , Both boeing and airbus list orders and deliveries while airbus doesnt list cancellatioins till year end while boeing updates cancellations every week .

Nice that you read the quarterly reports of Boeing company well, but it seems that you got my point now: Whatever they invest on the B747, they don’t do it on considerations of their financial abilities but the expected profits. As that the whole B747-8I can well be cancelled. While at the moment they are well off with F-orders and can work the market until they find one to order the Pax-version.

To the A350 orders:
What will the orders be when the program is not launched? The “orders” of the A350 say nothing else than “we buy whatever comes out of your factory”. The airlines ordered payload-range capability at a cost-promise. So when Airbus promises to be better on the A350 then originally planned there is no need to cancel promising slots.
Airbus homepage talks of commitments only.

Buddy, do you really think the “orders” of the A350 have ever been for real?

Yes it does , Apart from LOI’s ( like SQ etc) the orders for the A350 are remarkably still there as no airline has cancelled although some airlines which had LOI’s have tranfered onto the 787 program.

program that is in such a state cannot have orders.

Unless for those that ordered , the price of staying is greater then the price of leaving.

The customers that filed orders have commitments at best.

A vast majority have LOI’s (basically commitments) however there are some 40-50 Firm orders which were booked . In their own ORDERS page airbus claims 13 orders (remember these are 13 orders and not 13 LOI’s , or 13 Commitments but firm orders as airbus does not list LOI’s or commitments on that page) for the A350 for 2005 alone.

No matter what kind of contract Airbus made with these customers, it is obsolete now.

That would only be the case if the airlines CANCEL their existing orders. If the new proposition (ie. a new and improved XWB) looks atractive to the airline then they will stay on specially when they are laying the MK1 price for an XWB. Infact i posted a news article stating that it would require close to a billion euros for airbus to compensate some of the airlines that had committed to the 2010 date but have now been offered 2013(tentative) slots .(the article is in one of the A380 , or Leahy threads) . Airbus have counted many A350 orders (for the original varient) and for the original XWB varient (that was supposed to EIS 2012) however they cannot recount those orders again on program launch unless they go back and cancel those orders first . For airlines like Finair,kingfisher who signed up its just a more atractive product but 3 years late .

but I guess most airlines that have A350 “on order” just reserve early delivery spots. Real business will be done after A350 re-launch.

A lot have LOI’s etc but those are seperate some like QR,finnair , kingfisher etc have FIRM ORDERS in place for the A350 .

Boeing is financially very powerful and can afford whatever they want. the won’t do, because Mr Shareholder will be very disappointed if the profit margin falls below double-digit.

Profit margins falling below double digits ? For boeing company as a whole the OPM is at close to 16% ( for a period of 2003-2005) and expect this to only get better once the BCA buisness (sales) of 2005,2006 start to bear fruit with deliveries. The Profit margin for BCA has gone up from a meager 5.5% from a few years ago to 9.8% and this is before the heavy WB sales of 2005,2006 take effect (majority get delivered). Both Airbus and boeing aim for a 10% PM from their airliner family in toto (reality of a very competitive duopoly) whereas they are getting 15-16% and 17-19% for their respective companies (EADS get close to 17-19% (as of 2005) in terms of OPM and boeing around 15-16% ) . For both the buisnesses Defence and aerospace is a more lucrative market .

If LH makes an order, Boeing would rename the B747-8 into Nightmareliner and paint the prototype in pink. Whatever they want. That’s business.

Why rename it Nightmareliner? According to a very well respected source at A.net nightmareliner is what Airbus jocks call the 787 in tolouse so that name might be taken allready 😉 .

Man, what you wanna tell me?

WHAT? You seem to be not willing to discuss!!

Man, what you wanna tell me?

Not always true , Just look at the airlines that ordered the A350Mki1 (AKA A330 on steroids) they were supposed to get an aircraft which was narrower,would have seated less(9 abreast not an option for many ) and would have offered less comfortable . What they get now is the XWB which is wider,greater PAX,greater range, more payload and comes a minimum of 3 years later . Look at what ANA,JAL and others who were the initial orderers of the 787-8 , they not get an aircraft which seats more PAX and Payload (boeign made the 787 slightly bigger in 2004-05) .

If I had the money, I would buy a Dreamliner, too …
Buddy, do you really think the “orders” of the A350 have ever been for real? A program that is in such a state cannot have orders. The customers that filed orders have commitments at best. No matter what kind of contract Airbus made with these customers, it is obsolete now. Maybe some airlines gave Airbus a wild card, but I guess most airlines that have A350 “on order” just reserve early delivery spots. Real business will be done after A350 re-launch.

Which means what exactly? So if a company makes more money elsewhere it has something fundamentally wrong with it ? Look at BAE ( who only until recently were onwers of Airbus (or EADS) ) and EADS and total up their defence buisness and you’ll see that they also do a lot of buisness in defence and aerospace.

Which means, that a company XY, that has a sub-division that accounts for 40% of its business, can afford quite a lot of money. Boeing is financially very powerful and can afford whatever they want. the won’t do, because Mr Shareholder will be very disappointed if the profit margin falls below double-digit. That is what you call “Business & Economy”, it is independent from the fact that Boeing produces aircraft and not tomato soup.

Upto a certain extent. If say LH place an order for the 747-8 (465PAX varient) in dec. 2006 (hypothetical but might happen ) the boeing can always make changes to improve upon the design so that they can offer the 8300 range without making compromise in payload (through effeceincies etc) like they are currently thinking of doing. What they cannot do is go back to 450 PAX and increase range unless they want to risk loosing LH as a customer.

If LH makes an order, Boeing would rename the B747-8 into Nightmareliner and paint the prototype in pink. Whatever they want. That’s business.

If an airline orders an aircraft, they order payload-range, cabin, operating costs, etc.

Not always true , Just look at the airlines that ordered the A350Mki1 (AKA A330 on steroids) they were supposed to get an aircraft which was narrower,would have seated less(9 abreast not an option for many ) and would have offered less comfortable . What they get now is the XWB which is wider,greater PAX,greater range, more payload and comes a minimum of 3 years later . Look at what ANA,JAL and others who were the initial orderers of the 787-8 , they not get an aircraft which seats more PAX and Payload (boeign made the 787 slightly bigger in 2004-05) .

I did not talk about the theoretical bugdet, which a company like Boeing (which makes 60% of its money outside civil aviation) can afford.

Which means what exactly? So if a company makes more money elsewhere it has something fundamentally wrong with it ? Look at BAE ( who only until recently were onwers of Airbus (or EADS) ) and EADS and total up their defence buisness and you’ll see that they also do a lot of buisness in defence and aerospace.

It is what the program gets from the board.

And the board only last month sanctioned more money into the program so that they could redesign certain aspects (strech the I version for one)

But Boeing hasn’t decided about the very most important thing yet (payload-range), and will/need do it when somebody puts an order.

Upto a certain extent. If say LH place an order for the 747-8 (465PAX varient) in dec. 2006 (hypothetical but might happen;) ) the boeing can always make changes to improve upon the design so that they can offer the 8300 range without making compromise in payload (through effeceincies etc) like they are currently thinking of doing. What they cannot do is go back to 450 PAX and increase range unless they want to risk loosing LH as a customer.

I dont think that recource is a major issue here and monetarily speaking boeing has allready showed that they will Put extra money (300 million over 2 years) if required into the 747-8 Program. The problem would be the future outlook , If boeing doesnt see huge no.s (and by huge I dont mean 300 I sales but something like 100-140) ….

I did not talk about the theoretical bugdet, which a company like Boeing (which makes 60% of its money outside civil aviation) can afford. It is what the program gets from the board.

If an airline orders an aircraft, they order payload-range, cabin, operating costs, etc. How the manufacturer achieves this is his problem. The “design freeze” is an engineering thing. But Boeing hasn’t decided about the very most important thing yet (payload-range), and will/need do it when somebody puts an order. That was my point. Short and simple logic.

The B747-8 still hasn’t scored any order, and as long Boeing doesn’t have an order the version ist not freezed. Simple logic.

thats not logic!! The Boeing 787 had scores of orders before design freeze. The A350 has 100 orders and design freeze is expected in 2008-09. The 747-8F had orders before it was frozen ( heck it was frozen just a few weeks ago) . The 747-8I has 3 orders before the design is frozen. I think you are confusing between PROGRAM LAUNCH and design freeze . The 747-8I can easily wait until the fleet descisions are made by BA,LH,EK etc as boeing cannot deliver (if ordered) until mid to late 2010 due to the fact that the F version and the remaining 744 orders have taken production slots . Boeing is currently evaluating how much to offer for the I and predict that there are very little chances that the I varient will secure a firm Airline order before the end of the year ( probably due to the fact that the main evaluaters arent due to make a fleet replacement discission until next year) however they see orders comming in next year. They will continue to talk with the Customers to see what they can do. If EK have a 10 aircraft (possible) order then I doubt that Boeing will spend the money to make the Range-PAX acceptable to EK , however they might give it the 8300nm and 465PAX strech a go if EK promises a large order (25+) . I think BA and LH fleet descision will be paramount here as they are widely touted as the launch customers .

What they want and do and achieve are three different things with additional contraints like available money and manpower.

I dont think that recource is a major issue here and monetarily speaking boeing has allready showed that they will Put extra money (300 million over 2 years) if required into the 747-8 Program. The problem would be the future outlook , If boeing doesnt see huge no.s (and by huge I dont mean 300 I sales but something like 100-140) for the I version then they wont try to add the extra 300nm and 15PAX however if they feel that by having strech commonality with the F version and by introducing more changes they can get more orders then they will do it . We must remember here that the I varient isnt really expected by any expert to be the cash cow for the 747-8 program (3-4 billion dollar R and D effort) however it will provide some relief while taking orders away from the A380 . The F version is the one that everyone expects to do well (and it has allready done so).

I dont think so . I dont think Leahy or any 1 at airbus really said something this vague . When you refer to 17% you need to be clear as to 17% better overall COST , 17% CASM ? 17% RASM ? etc etc , Boeing have targeted their 747-8I so that it delivers slightly better CASM then the A380-800 (note the -800 and not the -900 which will blow away CASM to levels never previously seen specially if it is reengined) however their Assertions (of a 10% lower CASM) are based on FUEL BURN on accounts of using the latest engines as well as the High price of aviation fuel . If the high Fuel price becomes lower then a lot of the CASM advantage (which boeing claim is slightly better then the A380) will be lost because even at this high cost (of fuel) the Fuel Burn still only contributes about 40% of CASM (according to a lot of the airline folks I’ve talked to ) , The other figures such as OEW , wing eff. etc are more constant . Another point of contention is that Airbus doesnt know the final version of the 747-8I , all they know are the engines it is going to use , Wings etc but they dont know the PAX (yet) as boeing is currently re-evaluating this as they had originally created a more effeceint design (after they tested it ) and found out that the range requirment was bettered by some 300-400 nm therefore they traded that for about 15 extra PAX . However once this was done airlines like EK said that they could well do with the extra range (opens up the Dubai-LAX route for favourable payload-range) therefore boeing juggled between either launching the 2 vareints (one with lesser PAX and 8300-8500nm range and one with more strech and 15 more PAX for 8000nm range) or creating more effeceincy through weight reductions,tweaking and reducing safety margins and comming up with one varient that can do both . Boeing is yet to decide on which ( 1 or both) aircraft is lauched and it seems they have more time to think as the F orders have pretty much hijacked the line till 2nd quarter 2010 and most of the airlines evaluating the 747-8 (BA,LH,EK etc) wont be deciding on fleet renewal desicsion till next year. Airbus simply doesnt have a boeing 747-8 varient to compare their A380 to other then the 744.

What is it that you want to tell me? As I said: These statements are common within the industry, but interpretation is to the reader.
The B747-8 still hasn’t scored any order, and as long Boeing doesn’t have an order the version ist not freezed. Simple logic. What they want and do and achieve are three different things with additional contraints like available money and manpower. The cost advantage over a competing design is nothing you dial in a mighty design computer, which then plots the blue-print.

Sounds the a380 is out of the woods finally.

Out of the woods might be a bit of an overstatement , I’d say ON ITS WAY…. No one really thought (since the wing issues were sorted out) that the A380 will have any signifincant delays in the Flight certification department , The production Certification is where the problem will occur as Until Airbus certifies the new Production procedure (wiring rework) they cannot start the assembly line unless they want to Certify each and every jet off the line (very costly and time consuming) . The issue about Wake seperation still needs to be resolved as airbus keeps claiming that they dont need the extra seperation and the authorities keep disagreeing with them . I think airbus is going to do this for the 3rd time (after not having convinced the athorities the first 2 times) and we’ll have to wait and see what happens. Then there is the wiring issue ofcourse which airbus assures has been dealt with , so another tough 6-8 months for the A380 before they deliver there first jet ( currently planned for late 2007) .

So how quiet is the a380 then?

Well being a modern aircraft it should be very quiet (relativly speaking) internally , externally it will adhere to QC2 norms . I predict that the boeing 787 and airbus A350 will be significantly quiter then the A380 both internally and externally due to damping and other issues ( ex the Cheverons on the 787 engines etc etc ).

I did notice the a340 were quieter than say a 777 but it still sounds like someone has a vacuum cleaner on.

It has a lot to do with where one is seated (on both a twin and a quad) and what the levels of vibrations are , I think that a lot of the T7’s noise is from vibration !!

He uses the stated performance figures by Boeing on a mission most probably favorable for the A380

I dont think so . I dont think Leahy or any 1 at airbus really said something this vague . When you refer to 17% you need to be clear as to 17% better overall COST , 17% CASM ? 17% RASM ? etc etc , Boeing have targeted their 747-8I so that it delivers slightly better CASM then the A380-800 (note the -800 and not the -900 which will blow away CASM to levels never previously seen specially if it is reengined) however their Assertions (of a 10% lower CASM) are based on FUEL BURN on accounts of using the latest engines as well as the High price of aviation fuel . If the high Fuel price becomes lower then a lot of the CASM advantage (which boeing claim is slightly better then the A380) will be lost because even at this high cost (of fuel) the Fuel Burn still only contributes about 40% of CASM (according to a lot of the airline folks I’ve talked to ) , The other figures such as OEW , wing eff. etc are more constant . Another point of contention is that Airbus doesnt know the final version of the 747-8I , all they know are the engines it is going to use , Wings etc but they dont know the PAX (yet) as boeing is currently re-evaluating this as they had originally created a more effeceint design (after they tested it ) and found out that the range requirment was bettered by some 300-400 nm therefore they traded that for about 15 extra PAX . However once this was done airlines like EK said that they could well do with the extra range (opens up the Dubai-LAX route for favourable payload-range) therefore boeing juggled between either launching the 2 vareints (one with lesser PAX and 8300-8500nm range and one with more strech and 15 more PAX for 8000nm range) or creating more effeceincy through weight reductions,tweaking and reducing safety margins and comming up with one varient that can do both . Boeing is yet to decide on which ( 1 or both) aircraft is lauched and it seems they have more time to think as the F orders have pretty much hijacked the line till 2nd quarter 2010 and most of the airlines evaluating the 747-8 (BA,LH,EK etc) wont be deciding on fleet renewal desicsion till next year. Airbus simply doesnt have a boeing 747-8 varient to compare their A380 to other then the 744.

A380 delivery on track

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/06/11/24/10084827.html

Ummm 17% better then a Boeing product that hasnt even been Designed (not even design frozen) yet!! I thought Airbus would have been a little smarter then this given what happened when they started claiming how much (%) the original and rearranged A350 versions were better then the 787.

He uses the stated performance figures by Boeing on a mission most probably favorable for the A380. Standard business practice which I don’t support either. But see who talked to whom and understand what the basic message was.

Sounds the a380 is out of the woods finally.

So how quiet is the a380 then? Cabin noise is something that bugs me. I’ve been on a340’s and they are meant to be pretty quiet. I did notice the a340 were quieter than say a 777 but it still sounds like someone has a vacuum cleaner on. If the a380 can better an a340 then that would be neat.

The A380 is supposed to be relatively quiet, but I don’t have any numbers on Boeing or Airbus aircraft. I guess cabin noise is a science in itself, saying a cabin is noisy is too simple (location, definitin of noise, bababa).

The news are nice to read but I wouldn’t rate this as the end of A380 problems. Check the messenger. Problems are solved (for any aircraft from any manufacturer) when aircraft is
– certified
– delivered
– in revenue operations.
Milestone 1 is taken quite soon.

Sounds the a380 is out of the woods finally.

So how quiet is the a380 then? Cabin noise is something that bugs me. I’ve been on a340’s and they are meant to be pretty quiet. I did notice the a340 were quieter than say a 777 but it still sounds like someone has a vacuum cleaner on. If the a380 can better an a340 then that would be neat.

A380 delivery on track

Dubai: Airbus has finally overcome the teething problems of re-wiring 500km of cables in its mammoth fuselage and expects the world’s first end-to-end double-decker to receive technical certification by December 13, a senior Airbus official said.

“We are now confident on delivering the A380 superjumbo as per the new dates,” Keith Stonestreet, product marketing director of Airbus’ A380 Marketing Division, told Gulf News yesterday.

“The A380 is undergoing the final series of tests with the Rolls Royce engines. It flew over Dubai last week on its way to China. Then it will fly to Johannesburg from where it will cross the South Pole to Sydney. On its final leg, the superjumbo will fly from Vancouver to Toulouse via the North Pole.

“By December 13, we expect to receive the Air Worthiness Certificate from both US regulators Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA).”

In essence, this means that the aircraft model is certified and technically fit for commercial flights.

Airbus has so far assembled 26 A380s as part of the delivery plan, in which the engineers will have to re-wire the cables as per the certification. Despite the cancellation of 10 A380Fs by Federal Express, the new firm orders for the superjumbo now stands at 166, up from 159.

In September, Airbus hinted at a further delay in delivery of the A380 of up to one year citing problems with wiring. “We had to re-do the cabling in order to match customers’ needs as well as our own requirements,” Stonestreet said.

“These are not major issues. However, we wanted these to be perfect as we are manufacturing an aircraft that will carry 555 passengers and rise to 35,000 feet in less than half an hour and capable of flying up to 16 hours non-stop.”

He said the aircraft is performing much better than expected. “It has the quietest cabin developed ever, with fuel efficiency 17 per cent better than the B747-800,” he added.

An Emirates delegation has returned from Airbus manufacturing plants last week to assess the situation on the re-cabling of the aircraft that caused the delay.

“Our engineers have returned from Toulouse. We are evaluating the audit information internally,” an Emirates spokesperson said.

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/06/11/24/10084827.html

Ummm 17% better then a Boeing product that hasnt even been Designed (not even design frozen) yet!! I thought Airbus would have been a little smarter then this given what happened when they started claiming how much (%) the original and rearranged A350 versions were better then the 787.

Must remember this doesnt include PRODUCTION CERTIFICATION only AIR WORTHY CERTIFICATION..