Boeing to delay first delivery of 787

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:05:34 -0700, me
wrote:

On Oct 11, 11:33 am, (John Kulp) wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:31:48 +0100, "William Black"
[snip]
The A380 addresses this market, which is already dominated by Airbus
products. The 787 is just another 300 seater wide-bodied jet.

Baloney again. Airbus is having huge problems selling the A380
because airports have to be rebuilt among other things and most of the
demand can be met with other aircraft that don't have this
requirement. Like the 787 and newer versions of the 747.

Well, you're basically rearguing the Boeing and Airbus positions.
Boeing has tried to sell stretch 747's to compete with the A380
but couldn't sell any. Flip side is that Boeing is selling 787's
hand over fist and Airbus has currently peaked with the A380.
The question still remains, once the uncertainties around
the A380 are worked out, will the markets support/demand
the aircraft in sufficient numbers? We know the market is
there for the 787. Boeing was betting that there wouldn't
be one for an A380 size (in sufficient numbers to try to
bother making one). Airbus was accused of going into the
market because they had nothing in the 747 size and
they hoped to take over the market. Time will tell whether
either was correct.

First, not true because they have sold several freighter versions of
the 747 already. The rest is absolutely correct.


Boeing believes that when the Asian markets take off,
their will be sufficient demand to support alot of 787's
flying direct to major desitinations, as oppose to
huge A380's flying to a few major hubs. I suspect there
may be enough market for both of them. But there may
never be a market big enough for two A380 size aircraft.

Again true, but it is looking increasingly likely that Boeing was dead
right about the A380 and it is looking increasingly unlikely that
enough will be sold to make a profit, especially with all the
penalties Aitbus has to pay.

On Oct 11, 12:32 pm, "William Black"
wrote:
"John Kulp" wrote in message

...

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:31:48 +0100, "William Black"
wrote:
Baloney again. Airbus is having huge problems selling the A380
because airports have to be rebuilt among other things and most of the
demand can be met with other aircraft that don't have this
requirement. Like the 787 and newer versions of the 747.

The two major airports involved in the India/Europe trade (Heathrow and
Bombay) are already committed to a 'double decker' type bridge suitable for
the A380.

The major problem at Bombay is the level of flights with international
flights already being challenged for slots.

There are no more slots there, the only solution is bigger aircraft.

Or more airports. Most major cities now sport multiple airports.
The tendency of many "low budget" airlines is to seek out under
use airports. In the US, point to point is becoming more and more
common. No guarantee that these same trends will play out in
new emerging markets, but it's the way Boeing is betting.

"me" wrote in message
oups.com...
On Oct 11, 12:32 pm, "William Black"
wrote:
"John Kulp" wrote in message

...

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:31:48 +0100, "William Black"
wrote:
Baloney again. Airbus is having huge problems selling the A380
because airports have to be rebuilt among other things and most of the
demand can be met with other aircraft that don't have this
requirement. Like the 787 and newer versions of the 747.

The two major airports involved in the India/Europe trade (Heathrow and
Bombay) are already committed to a 'double decker' type bridge suitable
for
the A380.

The major problem at Bombay is the level of flights with international
flights already being challenged for slots.

There are no more slots there, the only solution is bigger aircraft.

Or more airports. Most major cities now sport multiple airports.
The tendency of many "low budget" airlines is to seek out under
use airports. In the US, point to point is becoming more and more
common. No guarantee that these same trends will play out in
new emerging markets, but it's the way Boeing is betting.


I love to know where to put the next Bombay airport, so would the city of
Bombay...

--
William Black


I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.

On Oct 11, 1:22 pm, (John Kulp) wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:05:34 -0700, me
wrote:
[snip]
Baloney again. Airbus is having huge problems selling the A380
because airports have to be rebuilt among other things and most of the
demand can be met with other aircraft that don't have this
requirement. Like the 787 and newer versions of the 747.

Well, you're basically rearguing the Boeing and Airbus positions.
Boeing has tried to sell stretch 747's to compete with the A380
but couldn't sell any. Flip side is that Boeing is selling 787's
hand over fist and Airbus has currently peaked with the A380.
The question still remains, once the uncertainties around
the A380 are worked out, will the markets support/demand
the aircraft in sufficient numbers? We know the market is
there for the 787. Boeing was betting that there wouldn't
be one for an A380 size (in sufficient numbers to try to
bother making one). Airbus was accused of going into the
market because they had nothing in the 747 size and
they hoped to take over the market. Time will tell whether
either was correct.

First, not true because they have sold several freighter versions of
the 747 already.

Not sure what you mean here. The 747 started out life as a
freighter.
I assume you're refering to the 747-8. This isn't quite the plane
Boeing originally try to sell to compete with the A380. They had
something a bit closer to 500 seats. They gave up on that one.
The -8 is just another in a long line of stretches and engine
mods.

The rest is absolutely correct.



Boeing believes that when the Asian markets take off,
their will be sufficient demand to support alot of 787's
flying direct to major desitinations, as oppose to
huge A380's flying to a few major hubs. I suspect there
may be enough market for both of them. But there may
never be a market big enough for two A380 size aircraft.

Again true, but it is looking increasingly likely that Boeing was dead
right about the A380 and it is looking increasingly unlikely that
enough will be sold to make a profit, especially with all the
penalties Aitbus has to pay

I was one who basically figured Boeing knew what they
were talking about, so it's a little self serving for me to be
predicting the A380 demise. They figure these things it
terms of decades and alot can change in that time. Airbus'
troubles are relatively short term there. Their problem
will be if they don't ever achieve their efficiency/capacity
problems. But if they do, and markets change
in their favor, they have to sell something like 500 of them
to be safely into profits. On a world wide scale, with
roughly no direct competition, that's not alot of aircraft.
Boeing thinks the overall market has room for about 900
of this "class".

On 11 Oct, 18:22, (John Kulp) wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 09:05:34 -0700, me
wrote:



On Oct 11, 11:33 am, (John Kulp) wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:31:48 +0100, "William Black"
[snip]
The A380 addresses this market, which is already dominated by Airbus
products. The 787 is just another 300 seater wide-bodied jet.

Baloney again. Airbus is having huge problems selling the A380
because airports have to be rebuilt among other things and most of the
demand can be met with other aircraft that don't have this
requirement. Like the 787 and newer versions of the 747.

Well, you're basically rearguing the Boeing and Airbus positions.
Boeing has tried to sell stretch 747's to compete with the A380
but couldn't sell any. Flip side is that Boeing is selling 787's
hand over fist and Airbus has currently peaked with the A380.
The question still remains, once the uncertainties around
the A380 are worked out, will the markets support/demand
the aircraft in sufficient numbers? We know the market is
there for the 787. Boeing was betting that there wouldn't
be one for an A380 size (in sufficient numbers to try to
bother making one). Airbus was accused of going into the
market because they had nothing in the 747 size and
they hoped to take over the market. Time will tell whether
either was correct.

First, not true because they have sold several freighter versions of
the 747 already. The rest is absolutely correct.



Boeing believes that when the Asian markets take off,
their will be sufficient demand to support alot of 787's
flying direct to major desitinations, as oppose to
huge A380's flying to a few major hubs. I suspect there
may be enough market for both of them. But there may
never be a market big enough for two A380 size aircraft.

Again true, but it is looking increasingly likely that Boeing was dead
right about the A380 and it is looking increasingly unlikely that
enough will be sold to make a profit, especially with all the
penalties Aitbus has to pay.

displaying your lack of knowledge again John ;-)

you're a GENUIS..........

me wrote:
On Oct 11, 11:33 am, (John Kulp) wrote:

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:31:48 +0100, "William Black"

[snip]

The A380 addresses this market, which is already dominated by Airbus
products. The 787 is just another 300 seater wide-bodied jet.

Baloney again. Airbus is having huge problems selling the A380
because airports have to be rebuilt among other things and most of the
demand can be met with other aircraft that don't have this
requirement. Like the 787 and newer versions of the 747.


Well, you're basically rearguing the Boeing and Airbus positions.
Boeing has tried to sell stretch 747's to compete with the A380
but couldn't sell any.

Really? No stretch 747's have been sold?

William Black wrote:


I love to know where to put the next Bombay airport, so would the city of
Bombay...


Isn't it called Mumbai now?

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:24:30 -0700, me
wrote:

On Oct 11, 1:22 pm, (John Kulp) wrote:

First, not true because they have sold several freighter versions of
the 747 already.

Not sure what you mean here. The 747 started out life as a
freighter.
I assume you're refering to the 747-8. This isn't quite the plane
Boeing originally try to sell to compete with the A380. They had
something a bit closer to 500 seats. They gave up on that one.
The -8 is just another in a long line of stretches and engine
mods.

That's the plane alright. And they are selling as freighters.


Again true, but it is looking increasingly likely that Boeing was dead
right about the A380 and it is looking increasingly unlikely that
enough will be sold to make a profit, especially with all the
penalties Aitbus has to pay

I was one who basically figured Boeing knew what they
were talking about, so it's a little self serving for me to be
predicting the A380 demise. They figure these things it
terms of decades and alot can change in that time. Airbus'
troubles are relatively short term there. Their problem
will be if they don't ever achieve their efficiency/capacity
problems. But if they do, and markets change
in their favor, they have to sell something like 500 of them
to be safely into profits. On a world wide scale, with
roughly no direct competition, that's not alot of aircraft.
Boeing thinks the overall market has room for about 900
of this "class".


Well, I don't know where these supposed market changes are supposed to
come from. The A380 may make sense for cases where true airport
capacity has been reached (like Heathrow) and a few routes already
defined, but the 787 makes a lot more sense on most other routes where
more frequent smaller capacity is what is desired by customers.

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 12:28:07 -0700, WorstGreatWestern
wrote:


Again true, but it is looking increasingly likely that Boeing was dead
right about the A380 and it is looking increasingly unlikely that
enough will be sold to make a profit, especially with all the
penalties Aitbus has to pay.

displaying your lack of knowledge again John ;-)

you're a GENUIS..........

Typical moron's response saying nothing at all

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In rec.travel.air John Kulp wrote:
On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 06:05:35 GMT, A Guy Called Tyketto
wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In rec.travel.air John Kulp wrote:

Yeah, only 2 years and several billions dollars late. And, of course,
it doesn't compete with the 787. The 787 competes with the new A350
whose first expected delivery is sometime in 2013.

That isn't the point. The point is that Boeing insisted that
the delays that plagued the A380 wouldn't happen with the B787.. Yet,
here they are, with delays on the B787. For Boeing, it's "Hello Face,
I'm Egg."


So did Airbus. So what's the big deal? The 787 is infinitely more
successful than the A380 which may well never be profitable and then
tried to flog a basic A350 as an alternative to the 787 which
absolutely no one wanted. New aircraft delays are nothing new anyway.
Big deal.

You missed the point. Airbus was the first with delays, yes.
Boeing (here we go again) *publicly stated* that they would not
encounter any delays in the production of the B787.

Now they've come full circle and say they have delays. That
totally tarnishes all that they've said in the buildup to the B787.
They really can't talk now. They have delays too. It's like when David
Lee Roth left Van Halen. He released an album called "Eat 'em and
Smile" while VH with Sammy Hagar releaed "5150". 5150 didn't sell as
well as Eat 'em and Smile. Then Roth released Hot in the Shade, which
bombed. Egg on his face. VH released "OU812" which skyrocketed. Both
album titles were messages to the other party who were enemies.

Replace David Lee Roth and VH with Boeing and Airbus. 'nuff said.

BL.
- --
Brad Littlejohn | Email:
Unix Systems Administrator, |
Web + NewsMaster, BOFH.. Smeghead! | http://www.wizard.com/~tyketto
PGP: 1024D/E319F0BF 6980 AAD6 7329 E9E6 D569 F620 C819 199A E319 F0BF
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHDuwmyBkZmuMZ8L8RAsSmAKDrH0KkrVXNDVq1vVSasI N+oqyJ2wCgveQM
tFcPGtHLNDGQ3TtT7OB7uUc=
=pnJN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----