Airbus demands launch aid with threats.

The US government is more than happy to bully foreign governments on Boeing’s behalf anyway, if that Indian government officer is to be believed.

And what were the comments of the french Ambassador to India, Dominique Girard,when he said that other factors were involved and that he hoped that the mirage 2-000 deal would not face the same fortunes…these in my and many others’s opinion are strongly worded statements..

LOOK all of us know that there is political interference from the govts. of europe and the US on several of the high stake deals..so why bother complaining about it..THIS IS THE TRUTH AND WE NEED TO LIVE WITH THE FACT. Every politician thinks of his political/national interest and therefore a healtheir boeing/airbus would mean more jobs for americans and the europeans..simple as that..

Still……….I’m a big fan of Airbus airplanes (very gracefull) but they are heading for one godallmighty HUGE implosion!

I dont think it is headed that way in a catastrophic sence..we will most likely see a 50-50 market where both manufacterers would have their ups and downs in a wave like pattern..boeing had it for so many years before airbus came in and bedazzled the industry…now boeing is fighting back with the 787,737NG,777,reduced prices through use of cheaper outsourced products and manufactering refinements as well as through changes that they have made as a company…WHAT WE CAN EXPECT in this polar enviroment is cut throat competition in the marketting/sales departments and more situations like the AI deal where claims and counter claims are filed..THAT IS A FACT WE ARE GONNA HAVE TO LIVE WITH FOR SOME TIME.

Completely agree………..

Still……….I’m a big fan of Airbus airplanes (very gracefull) but they are heading for one godallmighty HUGE implosion!

I don’t think EADS expected Boeing to come back as strong as they have in the last few months after the European manufacturer had taken over the lead in both orders and deliveries. This is where many might think that Airbus might be headed toward an implosion. However, I am sure that once a new CEO is nominated in Toulouse and that other problems are solved (The nomination to EADS’s co-presidency), things will slowly get back to normal. EADS and its people have worked far too hard to see the recent successes go down the drain.

Still……….I’m a big fan of Airbus airplanes (very gracefull) but they are heading for one godallmighty HUGE implosion!

What brings you to that conclusion……………

Still……….I’m a big fan of Airbus airplanes (very gracefull) but they are heading for one godallmighty HUGE implosion!

this “A350” smacks of desperation…I thought Airbus was better than that.

I must admit…I didn’t. :diablo:

Yea verily, OSH. 🙂

I don’t think we EVER get the full facts about Boeing or Airbus finances,so commenting on it ,to me,is pretty pointless.
All we see are press releases,and who believes everything they read in the papers?

This could well be a bluff by Airbus ,threatening NOT to give Bae work to get loans from the UK government(sorry,said I wouldn’t comment!). I don’t see this thread going anywhere. Whatever you believe,I don’t think this thread is going to change your mind.

Indeed………I expected more from Airbus……….They have allways been so inovative, and lets face it, they make beautiful airplanes………..but this “A350” smacks of desperation…I thought Airbus was better than that.

Cor! youv’e got to admit this sells papers if nothing else. But I have to ask the question….Are any of us on here sufficiently qualified to call the A350
“Half baked and not needed”? I’m now into year 23 of my ops. career and I don’t feel I am, but of course I can speculate that it is, only I don’t. 😉

The the “uneeded Half baked” comments was taken from what we know of the A350. A re-engined A330 in essence. Until they announced the A350, Airbus were very secure in the beleif that the a330 would suffice. Hence the unneeded part of the statement earlier.

I dont think airbus are threatening the government, and I will reiterate my previous reply in stating that journalistic license has been used to sensationalise a statement of fact.

The uk aerospace industry now hinges on Aircraft Engines, Undercarriage, and Airbus aircraft wings.

The hangar next to my office is currently being revamped from bae 146 fuselage assembly to A400M wing assembly. Portacabins are going up almost every week almost completely in order to facilitate the A350 program (as you can tell, no ones too keen about being pinched from the a380, in its nice newish building to go work in a portacabin!! ) this project is going ahead, the design of the wing structure WILL be carried out in the UK, and, as is already stated there is no decision on an assembly site.

the money required by airbus will mainly go into assembly operations of parts manufactured by contracting companies around the uk, and the world in general, airbus uk will be stuck for cash if it cant build a350 wings somewhere in the UK, as I doubt they can be built at broughton without some major re-work, because of the intricacies of composite assembly and manufacture (it may even require a seperate assembly line and everything that goes with it from the metallics). this may lead to a shift in the core excellency AUK and BAE have in wing design and manfacture. Design is still a liklihood in the uk if a350 goes elsewhere but the uk will be required to swap a core competency with another airbus country in order to maintain an assembly/manufacture base…..fuselages are not the most glamourous of things!

This isnt hard to understand when thought out…………………….a design office only looses money. manufacturing lines can make LOTS OF MONEY, they may also loose you a bit too, but in essence, if you want major design capability you must also have a major manufacturing base to keep the design up and running. This is FACT in the aerospace world.

Cor! youv’e got to admit this sells papers if nothing else. But I have to ask the question….Are any of us on here sufficiently qualified to call the A350
“Half baked and not needed”? I’m now into year 23 of my ops. career and I don’t feel I am, but of course I can speculate that it is, only I don’t. 😉

Airbus are threatening the UK government with mass unemployment at BAe unless we cough up the dough they demand to develop the untill recently not needed and half baked A350.

If it saves jobs at BAe it may well be money well spent, although it may not at the moment be obvious where the jobs will go. In addition, there is nothing new about governments paying certain industries favours to give them the competitive advantage – there is a list as long as a piece of string of examples. It happens, and journos can paint it any way they want – that is their priviledge.

Which shows you that both Airbus and Boeing play hardball, and that it is childish (to say the least) to constantly stress the bad behaviour of one and condone the similarly bad behaviour of the other.

On a more serious note, Airbus argues that it doesn’t get subvention from European government, but loans that it repays in due time. If this is the case, can any one explain: a) does Airbus indeed pay back the amount in full, and b) if yes, why doesnt Airbus get those loans from banks or other private financial institutions????

I have not once ever portrayed Boeing as being squeeky clean. Nor have I ever said they are the good guys and Airbus the bad guys.
However, my comments have been and continue to be taken out of context at every possible opportunity.

You do however raise a few good questions.

I beleive the answer is yes, Airbus to repay some of the money they get… but under extremely favourable rates (as has been discussed on this forum countless time)
And the reason they don’t go to banks is because they’re had to pay back the loans at normal business rates.

Again people, I stress my point here.

Airbus are threatening the UK government with mass unemployment at BAe unless we cough up the dough they demand to develop the untill recently not needed and half baked A350.

And when one company gets so much help it faces less risk thus can expand much much quicker and put others out of business.
Is that good for the industry?

Well the you must close nearly every car manufacturer in the world, as all are recieving or have recieved a form of such help.

Yeah and airbus has never bribed anyone…. cough INDIA cough

Which shows you that both Airbus and Boeing play hardball, and that it is childish (to say the least) to constantly stress the bad behaviour of one and condone the similarly bad behaviour of the other.

On a more serious note, Airbus argues that it doesn’t get subvention from European government, but loans that it repays in due time. If this is the case, can any one explain: a) does Airbus indeed pay back the amount in full, and b) if yes, why doesnt Airbus get those loans from banks or other private financial institutions????

Check out BBC News 24 article about our Peter refering to Airbus and Boeing. The worlds “children” and “immature” spring to mind (not talking about sandy ;))

Further more i suppose Peter Mandelson is on the Airbus back hander payrole eh Sandy? Im sure youll convince us that he is a pro airbus person. I think Bombardier and Embraer are showing their maturity by not getting involved in such debates as im sure they have recieved funding as well! 😉 After all even MY company has been funded by the Government and the competition are not complaining (well yet….)

know nothing of him.
Total off topic and flame bait.

Sandy – let the Moderators do the Moderating, there’s a good chap. :rolleyes:

It’s getting a tad tiresome now, old man.

Grey Area
Moderator

Further more i suppose Peter Mandelson is on the Airbus back hander payrole eh Sandy? Im sure youll convince us that he is a pro airbus person. I think Bombardier and Embraer are showing their maturity by not getting involved in such debates as im sure they have recieved funding as well! 😉 After all even MY company has been funded by the Government and the competition are not complaining (well yet….)