Currently, Airbus is in a sorry situation of not being able to produce and supply their new, super-large passenger or cargo aircraft to any airlines or government on a timely basis. Poor planning resulted substantial production delays. Examples are wing wiring that won't propery mate with harnesses in the fuselage and each airline wanting complex customizations. As a result, the Brits are buying Boeing C17's because Airbus said that it must roll back deliveries of the 400M to late 2008. Analysts believe it to be later. FEDEX cancelled its order for ten 380 freighters and went with fifteen Boeing 777 freighters.
In June 2006 Airbus took it in the shorts when major investors bailed out just prior to news of even more production delays (a Euro Enron, huh?). Analysts say the losses to Airbus will be in the billions of euros.
The idiots who designed the A380 failed to consider just how few facilities can handle this large aircraft without spending substantial money on infrastructure changes to the boarding facilites. Of these airports: ORD, LAX, DEN, DUL and ATL, which has the capital to build new gate facilities? None. Airlines don't have that kind of money to spend right now. AAL, UAL, Delta, et al, are taking hits in their wallets because of high fuel costs. They can't afford to pay the cost of gate and baggage handling improvements, as they are just on the edge of or are just recovering from bankruptcy.
I am a retired Naval Aviator and a very frequent flier. I book my flights to specifically AVOID ANY Airbus aircraft. I will fly Boeing first and only.
2007-01-01 06:01:52
·
answer #1
·
answered by cdnewfie 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
For what? The A380 is better than the B747-8 or B777 for busy routes, like the majority of the worlds long haul flights. The B787 will be competing with the A350 in a few years time, when Boeing can sort out their problems which have delayed it 6 months. The 787 realluy competes against the 777, 767 and A310 rather than the A380/747-8. It's for the expanding routes that are currently served by other twins rather than for the LHR-SFO, ORD-CDG type of routes that have already run out of departure slots and run full 747s all the time. The only answer for JFK-LHR is bigger aircraft, or less demand. I'd always prefer a quad over a twin because I'm an engineer and I don't trust the assertions that the twin failures we have had are the only twin failures we will have, losing both engines 200 minutes away from land isn't going to be good news.
2016-05-22 23:09:00
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It seems as though Boeing is winning the widebody orders for aircraft. With so many delays in the A380, many airlines opted to go with Boeing. Also the 777 competes directly with the A340. When the price of fuel went up, so did the number of orders for the 777 because it was less costly to operate an aircraft with 2 engines versus an aircraft with 4 engines. In the year 2005, even though Airbus had more aircraft orders, the dollar value of the deal was not as high as Boeing because Boeing was winning orders for long-range aircraft while Airbus was winning many of the single-aisle aircraft orders.
2007-01-03 04:54:09
·
answer #3
·
answered by potatochip 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with Boozer on the Airbus quality. They just don't have it. We are regularily having Engineering Dispositions conducted on our fleet of A340s. We don't seem to have nearly as many problems with the Boeing products.
From a pilot point of view the Airbus is the choice. From an Engineer's or mechanic's point of view Boeing all the way. I like the L1011 best of all though.
As far as selling the most it's difficult to answer as contracts are written with options to purchase extra a/c. Both companies have experienced reduced and cancelled contracts of late as well. Boeing still holds the lead but that may not hold for long.
"Boeing is the world's leading aerospace company and the largest manufacturer of commercial jetliners and military aircraft combined."
2007-01-03 18:25:58
·
answer #4
·
answered by a6peacekpr9 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
As an aircraft mechanic, I can definetley tell you that Boeing is a much better designed aircraft as far as systems go. Airbus takes the position that they know better how to operate the aircraft than pilots, or mechanics. As far as Boeing goes, the pilot has the final say period.
All one has to do is see the vid from the Paris Air Show when Airbus was showing off the A230 that prompted the joke, what's the difference between a lumberjack and an Airbus?
About 200 trees an hour.
2006-12-31 00:04:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Boozer 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
Airbus has been outselling Boeing in the past 5 or so years..Boeing is a good company put personally i rather fly in an Airbus cause they seem to be built better and are a newer design, and there safety record are amazing.
2007-01-01 17:30:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Phil N 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would prefer the 777 from boeing and the A340-600 from Airbus. More over i think Boeing is better than Airbus.
2006-12-30 21:09:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by ZUS 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
What kind of question is this?!? Of course it's Boeing!
(On Airbuses, when you're about to land, the computer calls out the altitudes, and then below 20 feet (or something like that), it starts calling the pilots retards! I know what it really means, but I wouldn't want my airplane to call a pilot a retard.)
2006-12-31 10:25:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Joshua Z 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It seems many people like asking this question. It's like asking Ford or Chevy. Everyone has their own opinions. They are both excellent aircraft manufacturers, who make excellent airplanes. My personal preference...as a passenger, Airbus....as a pilot, Boeing.
2006-12-30 19:30:50
·
answer #9
·
answered by sfsfan1 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Airbus is winning the race but, it is nothing beside Boeing, as it is not comfortable and wider but , Boeing is.
2006-12-30 19:54:20
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋