First, I appreciate knowing that some have taken the time to read and have enjoyed my posts…
2nd, as I said before, I am not an Airbus fan or salesman but rather someone that believes all aspects of life need to be considered in all dimensions if one is willing to find the truth.
My concern in this thread – and it has come out – is that some supporters of AA have branded A, F, and McD-D as 2nd tier planemakers and at the same time see Boeings as incapable of doing anything wrong.
I find such prejudicial thinking dangerous, regardless of the manufacturer – or subject for that matter.
The simple fact is that Lockheed, McD-D, and Fokker don’t make larger commercial transports anymore because they could not produce products which the market wanted. But that argument cannot be made about Airbus.
The L1011 became obsolete because of domestic twins such as the 763 and 764 which could carry almost identical loads at a fraction of the cost and the L1011-500/L1011-250 could only operate on transoceanic routes by removing 20% of the capacity.
The D10 was not much different except it did not require a “shrink” in order to serve longhaul routes. But the M11 was not much improved over the D10 and both fell prey again to much nimbler and more efficient aircraft such as the 767 and 330.
But Airbus will likely sell more copies of the A330 than any other Boeing model and the A320 sells at similar rates to 737s. You cannot argue that Airbus aircraft are no good unless you want to also argue that half of the airlines in the world don’t know what they are doing.
What is clear is that Airbus doesn’t build aircraft THE SAME WAY Boeing does. They have different ideas about engineering – but that also can be seen in the differences in the way a Vokswagen or Audi and a Cadillac are engineered.
Apparently, enough of the world’s airlines can accept Airbus’ philosophy of engineering and its resulting products, including perhaps the shorter life span. Given that airplane technology usually changes before the 20 year life cycle of an airplane (as US airlines see it) occurs – and most other airlines in the world use aircraft for much shorter periods, maybe Airbus’ strategies aren’t so off the wall.
Boeings have indeed suffered from fuselage cracks after hard landings such as happened here:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Royal-Air-Maroc/Boeing-767-36N-ER/1538735/L/&sid=12469f7130791b029fbed7d876b85869
And let’s not forget what happened to his bird after an uncontained engine failure… if this plane were flying, it probably would have not landed safely.
http://www.airliners.net/photo/American-Airlines/Boeing-767-223-ER/1563878/L/&sid=12469f7130791b029fbed7d876b85869
Clearly, catastrophic events can occur to any manufacturer’s product; to pretend that Boeing’s are exempt is ….
Let’s also remember that several of the accidents mentioned above involved human error – whether it be maintenance or pilot error. If McD-D says ‘don’t remove the engine and pylon as a unit”, well don’t be surprised if something goes wrong. If AS failed to maintain the jackscrew, then problems WILL occur. And as asinine as it might be to you or me, if Airbus says don’t swing the rudder hard in flight, they apparently mean it. (although, why they didn’t make their computers capable of minimizing the impact is beyond me)
Let me say without hesitation that Boeing builds the best longhaul airplanes in the world and that is completely supported by sales and performance data. Boeing has continued to perfect longhaul aircraft and when it comes to over 12 hr flights, Boeing rules the skies.
The 777 is hands down the market leader and the fact that the 772 has grown into the 77LR and 773ER which both have outsold and outperformed their Airbus competition shows where Boeing’s strengths are and where Airbus has been trying to build a competitive product.
I can’t wait for the day when DL decides to fly from the US nonstop to SIN or BKK and use the full capabilities of the 77LR against the 345. While SQ or TG’s ramp agents are counting kid weights to make sure they aren’t overweight with less than 200 passengers, DL will be loading pallets of cargo in addition to a full 275 passenger load. Bring it on! It’s no surprise that SAA is having to scramble to operate nonstops between the US and JNB in both directions again after the LR has enabled DL to chip away at SAA’s market because of the LR’s performance capabilities.
And I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if one of the markets AA has its eye on is MIA-JNB with the 773ER.
While Boeing has not allowed any cracks in its longhaul strategy, the 330 has or will grow to likely outsell every other Boeing model because it is optimized for under 12 hr longhaul flights – and it does it very economically. Ironically, the 332 would probably never have been built – or at least not sell near as many - if Boeing had not listened to DL and “neutered” the 764 so it could fit into gates at LGA. Thus, the 764 is a decent under 12 hr airplane but it could have been far more if Boeing could have put a larger wing and more powerful engines on it. Similarly, the 333 made the 772A obsolete because it is too heavy for the missions it can perform.
So, I don’t want to argue A vs B… but anyone (AA mgmt included) that runs from a particular model or mfr because of problems that may have roots in how that product is used are likely to pay a price for that bias (it’s not just a preference at that point). And I also doubt that Boeing is going to find the need to reduce prices for AA to the levels they offer to other airlines that will consider A’s products.
Finally, the M90 also didn’t sell well because it was essentially an M80 with more fuel efficient engines which provide some range… but the M80 and the M90 fall far short on long haul domestic routes. The 738 could clearly do that job. But now that M90 prices are 20% or less of a new 738, the economics most certainly work for DL to acquire them. And DL apparently agreed that the notion that fleet complexity is too costly when you have to pay full price for M90s but if you are buying them used and greatly reduced prices, fleet complexity is not such a big deal.
Perhaps AA too will decide that the M80 is worth keeping around if they are able to renegotiate lease prices and/or if lease prices for M80s remains well below prices for the 738 or its successor
