Author Topic: AIRBUS Engineers slam 7E7 (Read 2106 times)

CyranoAH · « **Reply #15 on:** June 23, 2004, 05:42:51 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gh0stFT
and Airbus 380 will beat the Boeing 7E7 anyway, so whats left ?

Lots of unemployed engineers in India?

Nashwan · « **Reply #16 on:** June 23, 2004, 05:51:06 PM »

Didn't Boeing get a subsidy from Washington state of over $3 billion fairly recently?

Toad · « **Reply #17 on:** June 23, 2004, 09:08:43 PM »

The civil version of the 707 has a wider fuselage than the KC-135. IIRC, it was built on completely different jigs as a result.

It's also not the only military design to have been sold commercially either.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #18 on:** June 23, 2004, 09:33:24 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gh0stFT
WHO will attack Europa and for WHAT reason ?

I agree there is no reason to attack europe at all, just like there was no reason for a certain country to attack Switzerland or Sweden in WW2....

Fishu · « **Reply #19 on:** June 23, 2004, 10:18:00 PM »

I don't understand why Boeing vs. Airbus has to be turned into a nationalistic argument?

They're just two different companies working on planes... and theres alot more.
Somehow only Boeing vs. Airbus often turns into a nationalistic bashing.

Vulcan · « **Reply #20 on:** June 24, 2004, 05:13:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Bodhi
Pongo,

A subsidy is proposed to help keep a company afloat, usually in it's development phases.

A government purchase is a legitimate purchase made usually to the lowest bidder (in the US atleast). Boeing sold aircraft to the US gov't, (many other gov'ts too) Airbus, received many billions in subsidies to keep them afloat. There is a major difference.

I find it hard to believe the US Goverment doesn't help Boeing out one way or another (tax relief etc) - the US Govt regularly props up its industries when they're in trouble, look how often they end up in front of the WTO getting fined for it. Recent examples include farming, forestry and steel.

Throwing the socialist insult at Airbus is ironic, if not totally hypocritical!

AKWeav · « **Reply #21 on:** June 24, 2004, 06:15:59 AM »

Quote

I don't understand why Boeing vs. Airbus has to be turned into a nationalistic argument?

I believe a poster from our neighbor to the north (who seems to hate all things US) started that particular bash.

_Schadenfreude_ · « **Reply #22 on:** June 24, 2004, 08:10:10 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKWeav
They don't need them. They know we'll come bail their tulips out again if they get attacked.

well not exactly......some people seem to hate Europe and Europeans.

Torque · « **Reply #23 on:** June 24, 2004, 08:20:26 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nashwan
Didn't Boeing get a subsidy from Washington state of over $3 billion fairly recently?

Who needs that when you have people like Perle.

deSelys · « **Reply #24 on:** June 24, 2004, 09:16:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKWeav
I believe a poster from our neighbor to the north (who seems to hate all things US) started that particular bash.

And what was Funked doing before that?

Pongo · « **Reply #25 on:** June 24, 2004, 10:10:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKWeav
I believe a poster from our neighbor to the north (who seems to hate all things US) started that particular bash.

What an assinine statment, I just hate dishonesty. If being honest is anti american, if saying Boeing gets hand outs is anti american, then you have real issues.

This thread was about Airbus guys dissing Boeing designs...how has the direction its gone off topic?

vorticon · « **Reply #26 on:** June 24, 2004, 10:24:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
I agree there is no reason to attack europe at all, just like there was no reason for a certain country to attack Switzerland or Sweden in WW2....

evil overlords have learned from the mistakes of the past, we now take out south america and africa first, then move into canada and australia, then once thats done we move on europe (starting with britain and not letting ourselves get holed up in france and spending the remainder of the war drinking wine while waiting for the reinvasion) once the rest of the world has been conquered we invade mongolia and from there invade the rest of asia...

or we just wait till 1 political party type gets into power in as many places as possible then take over and have the nations join...yes that will work nicely...

beet1e · « **Reply #27 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:46:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dago
I have enough experience with Airbus aircraft to certainly believe that the Airbus people shouldn't throw stones at other manufacturers.

dago

I know you hate me, but those split infinitives are like a kick in the goolies.

boxboy28 · « **Reply #28 on:** June 24, 2004, 01:50:58 PM »

I cant believe RIPSNORT hasnt responed to this thread yet!

AKWeav · « **Reply #29 on:** June 24, 2004, 02:08:21 PM »

Quote

I just hate dishonesty

And judging from most all of your posts, virtually anything Americian. You gotta admitt, you're usually the first to chime in with a negitive view of anything US.

Granted I work for Boeing and may be somewhat biased in my view of Airbus. I also know that Airbus has dumped their airplanes on the market for less than what it costs to build them. I know that airline board of directors love Airbus because they are very cheap to buy, while most pilots, and maintenance people don't like them. Airbus customer support sucks, and the price of their spares are through the roof.

I'm fairly sure that Airbus will never see a penny (or euro) of profit on the A380. I don't think they will sell enough of them. In a captalistic enviroment the plane would not have been built. Only in a Socialistic enviroment with goverment funding can such a project be undertaken. Very similar to the AN 224, of which only two were built.