Airbus scores Air Asia order

"Not the Karl Orff" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Nik" wrote:

"AJC" wrote in message
...
http://sg.biz.yahoo.com/041216/15/3pasb.html

Seems like there is no stopping Airbus at the moment, and Malaysia are
due to decide on a replacement for their 737s soon too.
--==++AJC++==--

Yet another indication that the NG decision was plain wrong!

Seems discounting, at least according to Boeing, was up to 60%

Don't fool yourself. Even if Boeing is right that a discount of unto 60
percent were offered by AI this can only be because Boeing itself had
offered a discount on their product - relatively speaking - not too
significantly lower. Relatively speaking if Boeing had only offered 20% AI
would have offered 25%.

The matter is that this in no way goes against my belief that the NG
decision was wrong. The old - even if improved - design of the 737 also
represents old - even if improved - manufacturing techniques. "Old" in this
context does not only means the product itself but also they way it is made!

Nik

Nik

Nik wrote:
The matter is that this in no way goes against my belief that the NG
decision was wrong. The old - even if improved - design of the 737 also
represents old - even if improved - manufacturing techniques. "Old" in this
context does not only means the product itself but also they way it is made!

Boeing listened to its customers who said they didn't want a "new" 737, thy
wanted a compatible one. If your have a large fleet of old 737s, it is to
your advantage to be able to gradually introduce newer 737s which are the same
type, instead of having a totally different plane. (Think of Southwest and
other airlines who brag constantly about having single type aircrttaft).

Now, that shouldn't have prevented Boeing from retooling the 737 line to have
more robots performing assembly to match Airbus's assembly efficiency levels.


My gut feeling is that the 737NG isn't THAT far from the 320, but that
diplomatic relations now have given Airbus a bigger edge than before,
esopecially in Asia.

Nik wrote:
The matter is that this in no way goes against my belief that the NG
decision was wrong. The old - even if improved - design of the 737 also
represents old - even if improved - manufacturing techniques. "Old" in this
context does not only means the product itself but also they way it is made!

Boeing listened to its customers who said they didn't want a "new" 737, thy
wanted a compatible one. If your have a large fleet of old 737s, it is to
your advantage to be able to gradually introduce newer 737s which are the same
type, instead of having a totally different plane. (Think of Southwest and
other airlines who brag constantly about having single type aircrttaft).

Now, that shouldn't have prevented Boeing from retooling the 737 line to have
more robots performing assembly to match Airbus's assembly efficiency levels.


My gut feeling is that the 737NG isn't THAT far from the 320, but that
diplomatic relations now have given Airbus a bigger edge than before,
esopecially in Asia.

"nobody" wrote in message
...
Nik wrote:
My gut feeling is that the 737NG isn't THAT far from the 320, but that
diplomatic relations now have given Airbus a bigger edge than before,
esopecially in Asia.

No doubt that the US is as unpopular as ever in the world - and no doubt US
business have a price to pay for that.

With modern day FBW I believe that Boeing could have developed a new single
isle line of aircrafts and made the quite compatible to handle with the old
737 so that pilots would need only a little extra training to qualify for
the new craft. I do not believe that the reason for the NG decision was
listening to their customers (something Boeing has always been extremely bad
at doing). Rather the reason was - as I believe to have been informed - that
the top brass in the company had got stock options encouraging them to have
a far too short-time vision for the company they were to manage.

Nik

"nobody" wrote in message
...
Nik wrote:
My gut feeling is that the 737NG isn't THAT far from the 320, but that
diplomatic relations now have given Airbus a bigger edge than before,
esopecially in Asia.

No doubt that the US is as unpopular as ever in the world - and no doubt US
business have a price to pay for that.

With modern day FBW I believe that Boeing could have developed a new single
isle line of aircrafts and made the quite compatible to handle with the old
737 so that pilots would need only a little extra training to qualify for
the new craft. I do not believe that the reason for the NG decision was
listening to their customers (something Boeing has always been extremely bad
at doing). Rather the reason was - as I believe to have been informed - that
the top brass in the company had got stock options encouraging them to have
a far too short-time vision for the company they were to manage.

Nik

Nik wrote:
With modern day FBW I believe that Boeing could have developed a new single
isle line of aircrafts and made the quite compatible to handle with the old
737 so that pilots would need only a little extra training to qualify for
the new craft. I do not believe that the reason for the NG decision was
listening to their customers


Consider Southwest. Currently, any of its pilo can jump into any one of WN's
planes. So, at one of its hubs, when a pilot doesn't show up, they can take
any spare pilot and put him on any flight.

The minute you have two different types, no matter how easy the training is
from one to the other, you need to distinct pilot rosters, and if a plane
breaks down and the spare you have isn't the same type, you need to change not
only the plane but to crew as well.

In the current environment, if a plane breaks down, they take any spare 737
and put it at the gate and the original crew works that flight.

Southwest had put a fair amount of pressure on Boeing to maintain the type rating.

However, had Boeing gone to a totally new 737 with FBW and other modern
improvements, what would Southwest have done ? They could have delayed buying
for a few years, they could have scrounged up older 737s from the desert, but
eventually, they would have had to bite their tongue and buy the modern 737s
and deal with the training and crewing issue during the time where they would
have a mixed fleet.

When you consider the training problems airlines originally had when the y
introduced the A320 because pilots weren't used to FBW systems, I am not sure
it would be wise to have a pilot that is rated on both the old mechanical 737
and new FBW 737s at the same time and operate the 2 different types in the
same day.

Nik wrote:
With modern day FBW I believe that Boeing could have developed a new single
isle line of aircrafts and made the quite compatible to handle with the old
737 so that pilots would need only a little extra training to qualify for
the new craft. I do not believe that the reason for the NG decision was
listening to their customers


Consider Southwest. Currently, any of its pilo can jump into any one of WN's
planes. So, at one of its hubs, when a pilot doesn't show up, they can take
any spare pilot and put him on any flight.

The minute you have two different types, no matter how easy the training is
from one to the other, you need to distinct pilot rosters, and if a plane
breaks down and the spare you have isn't the same type, you need to change not
only the plane but to crew as well.

In the current environment, if a plane breaks down, they take any spare 737
and put it at the gate and the original crew works that flight.

Southwest had put a fair amount of pressure on Boeing to maintain the type rating.

However, had Boeing gone to a totally new 737 with FBW and other modern
improvements, what would Southwest have done ? They could have delayed buying
for a few years, they could have scrounged up older 737s from the desert, but
eventually, they would have had to bite their tongue and buy the modern 737s
and deal with the training and crewing issue during the time where they would
have a mixed fleet.

When you consider the training problems airlines originally had when the y
introduced the A320 because pilots weren't used to FBW systems, I am not sure
it would be wise to have a pilot that is rated on both the old mechanical 737
and new FBW 737s at the same time and operate the 2 different types in the
same day.

"Nik" wrote in message
...

"Not the Karl Orff" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Nik" wrote:

"AJC" wrote in message
[snip]

discounting, at least according to Boeing, was up to 60%

Don't fool yourself. Even if Boeing is right that a discount of unto 60
percent were offered by AI this can only be because Boeing itself had
offered a discount on their product - relatively speaking - not too
significantly lower. Relatively speaking if Boeing had only offered 20% AI
would have offered 25%.

The matter is that this in no way goes against my belief that the NG
decision was wrong. The old - even if improved - design of the 737 also
represents old - even if improved - manufacturing techniques. "Old" in
this context does not only means the product itself but also they way it
is made!

Nik


Actually Boeing's manufacturing technique on the NG 737's is quite different
from the "classics" - they have speeded up the process and made numerous
changes. The 737-NG and the 737-Classics ('200-'300-'400) are pretty much
different airplanes altogether.

That's not to say that Airbus doesn't make an arguably nicer product in that
size range. The A318's, A319's, A320's and A321's compete roughly size wise
with Boeing's 737 600's, 700, 800's, and 900's, but for the passenger, their
slightly wider fuselage makes the planes seem more comfortable than Boeings.
I just returned from a trip with my 93 year old father - I was literally
able to push his full-size wheelchair down the aisle of a Northwest 320 to
the first row of coach (row 5). Can't do that on any of the Boeings :-)

Jeff

Jeff

"Nik" wrote in message
...

"Not the Karl Orff" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"Nik" wrote:

"AJC" wrote in message
[snip]

discounting, at least according to Boeing, was up to 60%

Don't fool yourself. Even if Boeing is right that a discount of unto 60
percent were offered by AI this can only be because Boeing itself had
offered a discount on their product - relatively speaking - not too
significantly lower. Relatively speaking if Boeing had only offered 20% AI
would have offered 25%.

The matter is that this in no way goes against my belief that the NG
decision was wrong. The old - even if improved - design of the 737 also
represents old - even if improved - manufacturing techniques. "Old" in
this context does not only means the product itself but also they way it
is made!

Nik


Actually Boeing's manufacturing technique on the NG 737's is quite different
from the "classics" - they have speeded up the process and made numerous
changes. The 737-NG and the 737-Classics ('200-'300-'400) are pretty much
different airplanes altogether.

That's not to say that Airbus doesn't make an arguably nicer product in that
size range. The A318's, A319's, A320's and A321's compete roughly size wise
with Boeing's 737 600's, 700, 800's, and 900's, but for the passenger, their
slightly wider fuselage makes the planes seem more comfortable than Boeings.
I just returned from a trip with my 93 year old father - I was literally
able to push his full-size wheelchair down the aisle of a Northwest 320 to
the first row of coach (row 5). Can't do that on any of the Boeings :-)

Jeff

Jeff

\ The minute you have two different types, no matter how easy the training
is
from one to the other, you need to distinct pilot rosters, and if a plane
breaks down and the spare you have isn't the same type, you need to change
not
only the plane but to crew as well.

In the current environment, if a plane breaks down, they take any spare
737
and put it at the gate and the original crew works that flight.

Southwest had put a fair amount of pressure on Boeing to maintain the type
rating.

Southwest's 737-700's have cockpits that "look" like the cockpits of their
737-200-300-500 series airplanes. Boeing was able to do this for them,
while still retaining "glass" cockpits on 737NG's destined for other
airlines.