Why is there so much anti-Airbus sentiment on Yahoo! Answers?

Question

I've noticed a lot of anti-Airbus (and some anti-European) messages on Yahoo! Answers.....why???!

Answer 1

Sorry to contradict but the first jet airliner was the Comet 4 and yet another English first as usual the ppl across the pond would love to rewrite history,Airbus is top of the tree.As with Concord it is a European effort,I see the folk in America were even beaten by the Russians in supersonic travel so perhaps they feel a bit inferior in aircraft design.

Answer 2

I believe I can give some neutral perspective, for I am not from either of the continents.

Its mostly the seemingly unfair backing of the European governments for the Airbus and the enormous amount of hype that the Airbus projects. I'd seen the A380 being described as "largest ever", "jumbo killer", "technological marvel" and all, when it wasnt.

And what has Airbus Industrie done for aviation when compared to Boeing?So far they dont have a successful pioneering design. You dont "kill" the Queen of the Skies with beauty salons and duty-free shops. The respect for the 747 was earned through performance, let Airbus show that, in the skies where it matters. Thats why I favor Boeing, they prove it in the skies, not only in press conferences.

Answer 3

There have been responses by others saying they like Airbus over Boeing. As for the anti-Airbus sentiment, it is probably because those people feel Airbus has an unfair backing of European governments of France and Germany.

Even though I prefer Boeing over Airbus, I believe having Airbus in existence forces Boeing to have to develop a better aircraft because if they don't airlines will give their business over to Airbus. Having 2 aircraft manufacturers benefits us the consumers/passengers.

Answer 4

I used to fly all over the US and Airbus aircraft was always less comfortable than Boeing's airplanes. My standard Carry on bag had a hard time fitting in an Airbus but fit just fine in a Boeing plane.

I just like the over all feel of the Boeing over Airbus.

Answer 5

Airbus is a failing company, anyone who thinks differently does not do their homework. They have been second to do everything as boeing comes up with a great design, then airbus hurries up and follows them with the same type but eveyone buys Boeing because Boeing came first and have been a trusted source for aircraft since the 707 in the 1960's. Ill take a look at the A3XX series for Airbus and compare it to the B7XX series from boeing.
Starting with the B767, released in 1982, what do you know, Airbus releases the A300 in 1983 with nearly identical specs, sounds like a copy!

Then the A310 tried to do what the A300 could not, which is beat the 767, again, it failed largely because it didnt have the capacity.

Then the A318, which was a bad idea, trying to beat one of the best planes ever put into production, the Boeing 737 which had been around for 20 years and still continues today to be on the 9th different variation on the same airplane.

Then the A319 which was nothing special, since it again was overshadowed by the B737 which had been around for much longer.

Then the A320, this was one of the good times of airbus but it wasnt as good as it could have been because of that damn 737 again, the 737-400 seated just a few more people and had very comparable operating costs. (note that all the examples from above have been airbus copying a boeing idea...)

The A321 may have been one of the most obvious attempts at copying that Airbus has attempted, look at the 757, built 20 years earlier, still serving airlines proudly and reliably, but the A321 tried to copy the 757, why, because the 757 was a huge success and the folks overthere in Europe wanted a share in the wealth, they didnt get it with the A321

Then came the A340, this was an attempted answer to the 777 that has become vastly popular though the years. The 777 holds more people, is faster, has longer range, and has a better seat/mile cost than any airliner ever built.

Now the A330 which was just an A340 with 2 fewer engines, another attempt, another copy, the A330 holds 293 pax. in a 2 class configuration, but wait, look at the 777, it holds 12 more people... the Boeing, first dilivered in May 1995, the Airbus, in Apr. 1998... Boeing wins again... this time very decisively, the first model of the A330 had a max range of 6400 miles, the 777's range was more than 3000 miles better with a range of 9420... and the 777 later set a record with a flight of 11664 miles without refueling... thats almost double the A330!

Now we see the A380 and anyone who doesnt get that Airbus wants a piece of the Super-Jumbo market is crazy. The 747 is the Queen of the skies and nothing will stop that, great range, good infrastructure, and more importantly, the ability to deliver. The A380 looks cool but if you read the news, you will hear that Airbus has pushed back delivery dates for some orders as much as 2 years, prompting the dropping of more than 100 orders in favor of the 747-900Freigher. Another Boeing victory.

Finally, Airbus has plans for the A350 which ironicly will hold the same number of passengers as the Boeing 787. But, intital indications are that the Boeing will be lighter, and thus have a better range and lower cost. ANOTHER WIN FOR BOEING.

I challenge anyone to come up with something to refute my arguements but I dont think you'll be able to... its all true

As a side note, Airbus has made a new engineering center in Mobile, Alabama, USA.... do they just want to get closer to Boeing? Or is America just much better? And it HAS to be one of those two... right?

Answer 6

Probably because Airbus is made by the French and I dont know if a lot of people in America like the French. Thats what I can see.

Answer 7

Boeing has been around longer, has built many of the workhorses of the US Air Force and commercial airlines, and is American made. Do the B-17 and the B-52 ring a bell? How about the 747 or 777? Boeing has a stellar safety record, as well. Why would Americans embrace the European Union's attempt to topple an American icon?

Answer 8

Yes,I don't understand the anti-European attitude on yahoo answers either (I'm German). I think it comes from Americans automatically thinking we hate them. That's not the truth, it's true that we are not fans of President Bush, but that doesn't mean we hate all Americans, there are some who travel to Europe though thinking nothing of blending into the culture. I've had plenty of Americans insult me on the train thinking that I do not speak English and then when I respond in my perfect English (which is required by German schools, so don't think I'm a rarity) they are beside themselves. That entertains me, but I generally like Americans once I get to know them, but there will always be the cultural idiots.

Answer 9

Despite of the high technology on board the Airbus airplanes they still don´t reach the glorious of BOEING did in the past. BOEING came first and had too much success. That still didn´t happen to Airbus. It will take to much time to happened. The aviation history is too short and the enthusiasts still have the "old" conquests in their minds.

Answer 10

even however lots of the posters have real solutions (we individuals tend to be ethno-centric), i think of it became into the preditory employer practices of Scare-bus that became me off. For years they made bargains to airlines to get them to purchase plane (jetBlue did no longer could desire to make a single hire fee for 5 years). They offered plane under value. they could try this because of the fact they have been sponsored by utilising the French government. An unfair earnings over Boeing, would not you assert? they could be while in comparison with Wal-Mart ... and Wal-Mart is a team of anti-union grasping louts.