Political Crossfire Forums

[ChuckBerry]

As a supreme symbol of Europe's prowess in aerospace, indeed in modern technology itself, the A 380 superjumbo jet, is melting down. No longer the embodiment of European cooperation and unity, its third announced delivery delay reveals internal chaos, bickering, finger-pointing and recrimination within Airbus and its parent EADS.

The whalejet, as it is known to some, has morphed from queen of the air into drama queen of the air.


The rest of the report.

From time to time I will read a report about the problems Airbus is having with the a380, an aircraft I read about with great interest a few years ago. I thought that Boeing's 787 Dreamliner was just a symptom of American industry playing small ball, but it turns out that it is a winning strategy that will gain them much prestige and a significant transformation of the way planes are routed and people are moved.

What does the delays of the A380 augur for the EU? The report includes speculation that problems of communication between French and German engineers contributes to the delays. What does this mean for the economic melding of EU member states? Are we witnessing the beginning of the end of this experiment?

[DSwain]

I think it demonstrates that multi-national projects are problematic by definition. Within EADS, this is further complicated by differing approaches to business imperatives and national identity. The French ownership element of EADS see the whole enterprise as a means to demonstrating French prowess following the maxim of 'what is good for France is good for Europe'. Meanwhile you have partners like British Aerospace - which is selling its 20% stake - with a markedly different view, seeing EADS purely as a commercial undertaking and ignoring the national imperative of nations such as France and Germany. Both approaches are wrong - though I think the BAe way is the least wrong; it's naive to ignore that some European nations still hold a lot of store in economic nationalism.

I think Europe needs to decide on what it wants and needs from its aerospace industry; is it a world class operation, taking on Boeing or more of a niche operation turning over a tidy profit, such as Bombardier or Embraer. Additionally, there is now the added ingredient of growing Russian interest in EADS; the 5% already owned by Russian bankers could increase with the BAe stake coming onto the market.

Re the EU - the lesson of EADS is that we all have different aims and objectives for European 'union'. Some nations want greater political union whle others want greater economic union; some want both while some only want a faint version of economic union. The Common Market / EEC / EU has been a success in its greatest objective - preventing war in western Europe and providing an economic fellow to NATO in the fight against communism. Now, though, what is it for? If you ask six Europeans you're likely to get six different answers; meanwhile, globalisation changes the whole game.

[Esin]

Great discussion. I wish I could add to it, but I don't know much about the EADS programme so, I wouldn't want to say something I'd regret.

[maxtsu]

I think the whole Airbus 380 story is fascinating and amazing.
A project this size could really only be operate in a multi-national role.
The size of this project is enormous, and the method of driving sections of the project in different countries was the only way to go.
With something of this size, any glitch will throw the project plan far off-course.
And this has happened again today (3Oct), Airbus have announced another 10 month delay.
I have no fear about the 380, or Airbus. These issues are ramp-up problems. Once the 380 goes into production, it will become a cash-cow, just like the 747 is for Boeing.

[mendosan]

maxtsu wrote: I think the whole Airbus 380 story is fascinating and amazing.
A project this size could really only be operate in a multi-national role.
The size of this project is enormous, and the method of driving sections of the project in different countries was the only way to go.
With something of this size, any glitch will throw the project plan far off-course.
And this has happened again today (3Oct), Airbus have announced another 10 month delay.
I have no fear about the 380, or Airbus. These issues are ramp-up problems. Once the 380 goes into production, it will become a cash-cow, just like the 747 is for Boeing.

The A380 is a very impressive machine, one that the USA won't be able to kill off like Concorde

[Proton]

Huh, I like how a past succesful history of A320/310/330/300 which had completely sidelined boeing for quite some time, is completely ignored for just one plane, which hasn't started deliveries yet (it flyies, but it's not really "complete" yet).

I find it amusing how this switches immediatelly to the EU, and the vitriol that is there, let's face it, those who write those articles want it to fail, want is as much in the world (while there is a distinct lack of Europeans "hating" the 7E7 like you see from certain americans), even if someone presented them in their business a plan of how the use of an A380 would cut their fees by 20% over any other solution, they would still not buy just to be opposition.

The answer to wither the 787 or the A380 is "correct" is that both are, for the simple reason that the air market is predicted to become THAT big, especially in the Asia-India area. They are build for two different purposes which both will continue to exist. The A380 is going to be succesful, due to the cargo version alone for the mere reason, that one airplane, is still going to be cheaper than two, for the distance the A380 covers, no matter what that is. And same applies for passengers.
There are already orders, the A380 just needs to stay "out there" for example, so people can get used to seeing in the terminals and start to get over their shyness. After that, I expect to be another airplane of the line, not a phenomenon, not a loss.

If anything, Boeing is concidering and I expect it to "strecth" it's boeing 747, putting it ever closer to a double decker, and Airbus continoues on it's own composite-fest long distance medium wide-body 7E7ish airliner, the A350 (complete with sexy wings).

[maxtsu]

Another reason why Airbus are losing money is the US v Euro FXchange.
Aircraft are traded in US dollars, bought and sold. It is a fact of life, as much as oil is traded internationally in dollars.

Airbus planes are manufactured in the EU and the cost is in Euros. But the sale price is already set in US dollars.
In the last 4 years the US dollar has dropped nearly 30% against the Euro.
This cuts into profits.

AirbusMiltary's A400M is being built for the EU market, for EU air-forces. Because it is sold to EU countries the sale price is in Euros.
Airbus will make no loss in FXchange because it is being built in Euros.

This simple example adds to reasons why the Euro makes sense.

[Politico]

mendosan wrote: maxtsu wrote: I think the whole Airbus 380 story is fascinating and amazing.
A project this size could really only be operate in a multi-national role.
The size of this project is enormous, and the method of driving sections of the project in different countries was the only way to go.
With something of this size, any glitch will throw the project plan far off-course.
And this has happened again today (3Oct), Airbus have announced another 10 month delay.
I have no fear about the 380, or Airbus. These issues are ramp-up problems. Once the 380 goes into production, it will become a cash-cow, just like the 747 is for Boeing.

The A380 is a very impressive machine, one that the USA won't be able to kill off like Concorde

Not nescessarily... I think the question is: "Can this SuperJumboJet survive in this current stage in the airline industry?" Personally, I think small to medium body jets would be more profitable... I'm more with the idea of the A-350. The A-380 would aslo have to put a fight against the new Boeing 747-8